Us Debate Over Medical Marijuana Heats Up

[Guest]

Posted by CN Staff on February 28, 2004 at 09:59:16 PT

Letter To The Editor By Michael R. Butz

Source: Chicago Tribune

Original article.

Chicago -- This is in response to "Marijuana is not medicine," by Andrea Barthwell, a deputy director at the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy and a past president of the American Society of Addiction Medicine (Commentary, Feb. 17).

Barthwell failed to include some very important truths not only about medicinal marijuana but, more important, the government's determination to keep facts, truth and the ability to make our own health-care decisions from us.

 

Her commentary should not be read in a health-care context but, rather, in the context of the war on drugs.

 

Marijuana is a Schedule I narcotic, according to the federal government. This means that it has no accepted medicinal value and is considered highly addictive and dangerous. What this placement really means, however, is that researchers looking into the effects of marijuana on humans can only receive permission from the government, the keeper of the keys, if their stated hypothesis is to prove marijuana unsafe.

 

Furthermore, prescribe marijuana to a patient in your medical practice, in a state where a majority of registered voters have approved its use, and the government may take away your license to practice medicine.

 

In fact, there has not been a single death attributed to smoking marijuana, nor any demonstrable studies to prove that marijuana use leads to the use of "harder" drugs or any of the other things mentioned in Barthwell's piece.

 

Barthwell mentions several times that a primary goal of our society should be to stop children from experimenting with illegal drugs in the first place. To this end, state and local governments have been strongly encouraged for more than 20 years to operate the DARE program in public schools, using police officers rather than health-care providers to essentially scare children into compliance with zero-tolerance programs.

 

Several years ago, to answer growing criticism and doubts about DARE's effectiveness, the U.S. government commissioned an in-depth study of children who had been through the program. Not only did this peer-reviewed study find that these children were not less likely to try drugs, they noted that it was possible that DARE actually encouraged drug experimentation. This report was quickly suppressed; the DARE program continues nationwide today.

 

Both government-commissioned and independent studies have also shown that random drug testing of students does not discourage drug experimentation and use. In fact, it tends to discourage students from participating in extracurricular activities--programs that are known to be beneficial to kids and to keep them off the streets after school. Yet President Bush recently called for $23 million to expand this program.

 

If Barthwell and the ONDCP are so keen on keeping our children from trying illicit drugs, why continue failed programs? Our children are put into programs known to be ineffective in helping reduce drug use. Then should they falter and get into trouble with drugs, they are no longer eligible for federal education aid as they try to finance college and beyond.

 

So first we put them into ineffective programs, then if they do try illicit drugs and get caught, we prevent them from learning.

 

Do these policies make sense?

 

What Barthwell's piece does clearly demonstrate is the continuing attempt to keep us afraid of marijuana, despite the facts.

 

Source: Chicago Tribune (IL)

Author: Michael R. Butz

Published: February 28, 2004

Copyright: 2004 Chicago Tribune Company

Contact: ctc-TribLetter@Tribune.com

Website: http://www.chicagotribune.com/