cannabisnews.com: Federal Court Says Yes, You Can Talk About Pot





Federal Court Says Yes, You Can Talk About Pot
Posted by CN Staff on November 10, 2002 at 20:12:04 PT
By Tanya Albert, AMNews Staff
Source: American Medical News 
Although the California case deals with medical marijuana, it has broader implications for frank discussions between physicians and patients.Physicians can discuss the pros and cons of medicinal marijuana with their patients without worry of the Drug Enforcement Administration cracking down on them, a federal appeals court ruled in October.
A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco unanimously ruled that a 1996 federal policy that said physicians could lose their DEA numbers if they discussed the issue tramples on First Amendment rights that allow a doctor and patient to discuss medical issues. The policy had some physicians fearful of discussing the issue with patients who have cancer, AIDS or other debilitating diseases and had sought their physician's medical advice on the topic. But this court ruling -- which upheld the lower court rulings on the issue -- should alleviate those fears. "Physicians can have a full, complete discussion about marijuana and offer an opinion on it," said Graham Boyd, director of the American Civil Liberty Union's Drug Policy Litigation Project, who argued the case before the 9th Circuit panel. "They can do what doctors do. They can give advice orally, in writing or other forms." "Those involved feel vindicated," added San Francisco HIV/AIDS specialist Marcus Conant, MD, one of the physicians who filed the lawsuit against the government. "The case was simply about what can happen when a patient closes the door and talks to a doctor." The ruling directly impacts physicians in most of the states that have legalized medical marijuana since the mid-1990s.  9 states have legalized medicinal marijuana. The case originated in California, the first state in the nation where medical marijuana was legalized. But Alaska, Arizona, Hawaii, Nevada, Oregon and Washington, which have similar laws, are also under the jurisdiction of the 9th Circuit. Colorado and Maine are the only other states in the nation with such laws. And even though the 9th Circuit court doesn't have jurisdiction over cases there, Boyd said "it would be surprising" if the government targeted physicians there who give advice to patients. The government could appeal the panel's decision to the full 9th Circuit or appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. Even if the case were appealed, the government could not sanction physicians while the case was under appeal. Since the lawsuit was filed in 1997, a court injunction has stopped the government from enforcing its policy. "The court ruling makes clear that physicians should be comfortable in discussing any therapeutic options with their patients, including medical marijuana," said Jack Lewin, MD, CEO of the California Medical Assn., which filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the case arguing the federal rule censored physician's speech and jeopardized patient care. "This ruling gives doctors a reason to breathe easier," Dr. Lewin said. What physicians can say While doctors can talk about the issues with patients, they need to be careful that they don't cross a line and discuss anything that could be considered distribution of the drug, Boyd and others said. Discussions about how marijuana could potentially help stimulate appetite or reduce pain, based on what physicians have seen in other patients or heard from colleagues, is well within the bounds of free speech. So is entering a discussion into the patient's medical record or putting it into another form of writing in the way that a doctor would document other patient discussions or physician recommendations. "Doctors write letters and notes and fill out forms for a million reasons," Boyd said. "They may give a patient a note to inform their employer that they are sick or have a disability. It is not a prescription. A prescription is an order written to a pharmacy to give a medication." Notes regarding medical marijuana could be written in the same manner as notes written for disability or illness. But if a seriously ill patient says he or she needs a note to get marijuana from a specific place, that could potentially cross the line into distribution. "It would be prudent for a doctor to avoid that," Boyd said. Dr. Conant said one of the reasons he took on the government in this case is because he believed that the government was letting politics interfere with what is said between a physician and patient. "This is not the first time this has happened," he said. "And I don't think we've put the issue behind us." In the past, the government censored what doctors could tell patients about abortion and stopped them from prescribing birth control pills. Court rulings helped change that. "Physicians at times need to stand up and say that the government is wrong," Dr. Conant said. Dr. Lewin agreed, saying the recent ruling should be a reminder to the government that it shouldn't try to practice medicine. "The federal government is acting emotionally rather than logically, intruding on the physician-patient relationship," he said. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Case at a glance Marcus Conant, MD, et al. v. John P. Walters (formerly Barry R. McCaffrey) as director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, et al. Venue:  9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals At issue:  Whether physicians can discuss the pros and cons of medical marijuana with their patients without fear of the government taking away their DEA numbers. Potential impact:  Physicians say the decision protects a physician-patient relationship that allows them to discuss the pros and cons of medical marijuana with a patient. The government says the decision jeopardizes the war on drugs. Source: American Medical News (US)Author: Tanya Albert, AMNews StaffPublished: November 18, 2002 Copyright: 2002 American Medical AssociationWebsite: http://www.amednews.com/Contact: http://ama-assn.org/public/journals/amnews/edlet.htmRelated Articles & Web Sites:ACLUhttp://www.aclu.org/Conant vs. Walters & Judge Kozinskihttp://freedomtoexhale.com//cw.htmMedical Marijuana Victory http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread14703.shtmlWhat U.S. Papers Say About Medical Pot http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread14630.shtmlPot Ruling Shields Doctorshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread14620.shtml 
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #4 posted by FoM on November 11, 2002 at 08:19:10 PT
Here's An Article I Just Posted
Cannabis Smoking 'More Harmful' Than Tobacco : http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread14714.shtml
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by Sam Adams on November 11, 2002 at 07:42:22 PT
Yes JR
I heard the same 2-line statement on BBC. My question, as always, is "Where are the bodies"? If cannabis is so harmful to your lungs, then it must be sickening and killing THOUSANDS around the world, right? Those impartial angels of healing, Western "Doctors", conveniently ignore the fact that no one is getting lung cancer or emphysema from cannabis smoking.If anything, the data on tars and carcinogens is revealing the incredible power of cannibinoids at suppressing cancer! Oh, but I'm just a ordinary mortal who didn't go to medical school and get hazed for 5 years by a bunch of old men as a resident. I don't know really anything. I forgot. Thinking for myself again - always gets you in trouble.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by JR Bob Dobbs on November 11, 2002 at 05:44:46 PT
Tickered off
I think it was Fox News that just ran something on their ticker about a UK study which claims to have found that cannabis smoke has just as much nasty carcinogens in it as tobacco smoke. Just a one or two-line blip, that's all - although they did call it "cannabis", which means maybe middle America knows it by that name now.Of course, few people smoke as much cannabis as a cigarette smoker smokes cigarettes. And if it has the same level of carcinogens, then why is tobacco legal and cannabis can land you in jail? Why can adults purchase cigarettes and freely ruin their lives, but if they smoke marijuana, even for medical reasons, they have to fear their own government?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by p4me on November 11, 2002 at 03:28:37 PT
The all-in-one DEA
They legislate. They execute. They kill. They steal. They corrupt. They lie. They are guardians of the CIA. But can they practice medicine? Of course they can. They are the all-in-one DEAth Department.1
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment