• printer friendly
• mail this article
• iPod format
• digg

Wednesday, October 30, 1996

A CLOSER LOOK AT PROPOSITION 215

By Tiffany Lauter

Daily Bruin Contributor

Marijuana has long been a substance of controversy. It finds its place in the spotlight once again this Nov. 5 in the form of Proposition 215, the legalization of marijuana for medical use.

The intent of the initiative is to amend state laws allowing people to grow or possess marijuana when recommended by a physician.

The measure provides for the use of marijuana when a physician has determined that the person's health would benefit from its use in the treatment of cancer, anorexia, AIDS, chronic pain, glaucoma, arthritis, migraines or, as the last sentence in the ballot states, for "any other illness for which marijuana provides relief."

The majority of the controversy surrounding the measure is targeted at the last sentence of the proposition. Paul Nordlund, a campaign coordinator for Citizens for a Drug-Free California fears that it encompasses too many ailments.

"This measure is too loosely written. Anyone could smoke pot, even children. And if I have a sore knee I could smoke pot for the pain," he said.

"There are other ways of treating a sore knee than with marijuana," said Dr. J. Thomas Ungerleider, a UCLA psychiatrist who has spent more than 20 years conducting government-approved studies on the physiological and therapeutic effects of marijuana and oral THC, the active ingredient.

He believes that clinical judgment is extremely important when interpreting the proposition.

"I have faith in doctors, that they are going to do the right thing and only prescribe marijuana when it is the best medicine," he said.

In a statement regarding Proposition 215, Sen. Dianne Feinstein said, "while the proponents of this initiative may be well-intentioned and focused on the needs of terminally ill patients, the drafting of this initiative is riddled with loopholes so big that it would have the effect of legalizing marijuana."

Under this proposition, marijuana will remain illegal for nonmedical use.

People caught with the drug will be prosecuted under current laws. In addition, the doctor who made the prescription will have to go in front of the court and validate the need for the use of marijuana.

Ungerleider adds that if doctors make a habit of loosely prescribing the drug, their licenses will be revoked.

Another point of contention is that the measure does not place any age restrictions as to who would be allowed to use marijuana. Groups opposing the proposition say this will damage their efforts to convince young people to remain drug free.

"It sends the message to kids that marijuana is OK," Nordlund said.

Ungerleider argues that another drug, cocaine, is used for medical purposes and that its use has not sent out the message that it is all right to use cocaine.

"The bottom line is that we have a callous disregard for dying patients if we do not get them out of pain," Ungerleider said.

He explained that there are a lot of different medications, but if a patient is unable to swallow or too nauseous to keep it down, then marijuana should be allowed as a viable symptom reliever.

Bruin Democrats President Angela Foster agrees.

"Despite the fact that there is no medical proof, if it (marijuana) can bring comfort, then it's almost inhumane not to have marijuana," she said.

According to the California ballot pamphlet, Proposition 215 is based on legislation passed twice by both houses of the California Legislature with support from Democrats and Republicans. Each time however, the legislation was vetoed by Gov. Pete Wilson.

A few of the larger groups in support of the proposition include AIDS Project Los Angeles, the American Public Health Association and the California Academy of Family Physicians. Larger groups that oppose the initiative are DARE, the California State Sheriffs' Association and Drug Watch International.

Comments

Post a comment