The New
York Times
NEW
YORK, MONDAY, DECEMBER 30, 1996
Marijuana for the Sick
Voter initiatives in California and
Arizona approving the use of marijuana for medical purposes are
spreading alarm among many families and confronting law
enforcement officials with a tough dilemma. Although the
voters in those two states have clearly spoken, it is impossible
for either measure to be carried out without someone violating
Federal law. The Clinton Administration thus has little
choice hut to insist that Federal drug statutes be
enforced. That response is not enough, however.
Federal authorities need to address concerns that a legitimate
treatment for seriously ill patients is being blocked because of
broader fears of marijuana abuse.
The Federal Drug Enforcement
Administration maintains there is no medical evidence that
smoking marijuana has ever helped anyone. But it is
difficult to dismiss the testimony from many seriously ill
patients and their doctors that marijuana can ease pain, reduce
the nausea associated with cancer chemotherapy, stimulate the
appetites of AIDS patients who are wasting away, and lower the
pressure within the eyes of glaucoma victims. The Food and
Drug Administration has approved a synthetic version of THC, a
main ingredient of marijuana, that can help in such cases, but
many patients complain that it is a poor substitute and is much
more expensive.
What is needed now is a more
thorough effort to test the claims from reputable sources that
marijuana may be a compassionate means of relieving
suffering. Many critics charge that drug enforcement
authorities have instead cut back on research out of fear that it
would become impossible to limit marijuana use to those who need
it medically. The fears are understandable, especially
given the rising use of marijuana among teen-agers today.
But it ought to be possible to regulate marijuana as a
prescription drug if it is found to be of legitimate benefit for
sick people.
State initiatives are a clumsy way
to set policy. The California proposition, for example, is so
vaguely written that it could lead to wholesale distribution of
marijuana well beyond the medical scope intended by those who
voted for it. It says nothing about withholding marijuana
from young people or from those operating dangerous
equipment. It also suggests that a simple oral
recommendation from any doctor would suffice. That loose
provision, designed to get around Federal laws that bar doctors
from prescribing an illegal substance, makes abuse of the new law
inevitable. The Arizona law, by contrast, requires that
marijuana be prescribed in writing by two doctors. But that
measure is also written too broadly. It says that many
other drugs, not simply marijuana, may be prescribed if
permission from two doctors is obtained.
Supporters of the California
measure did their cause no good by immediately lighting up
marijuana cigarettes after it passed last month and proclaiming
that a legitimate medicinal use would include smoking a joint to
relieve stress. Dennis Peron, originator of the California
initiative, said afterward: "I believe all marijuana use is
medical - except for kids." These actions made it
obvious that the goal of at least some supporters is to get
marijuana legalized outright, a proposition that opinion polls
indicate most Americans reject.
Parents have legitimate concerns
about the increase in marijuana use among teen-agers. Many
who used marijuana a generation ago are struggling over what to
tell their children, but they need to realize that today's
marijuana is more potent than the version they smoked and that
research has shown the drug to be far more dangerous to young
people than was known in the 1960's and 1970's. It can be
particularly harmful to the growth and development of teen-agers.
California's Attorney General,
Daniel Lungren, has ordered state law enforcement officials to
interpret the initiative's language narrowly and require proof
from those arrested that marijuana is being used medically.
President Clinton is expected to announce today an aggressive
campaign to combat the two state initiatives, including criminal
prosecution of doctors who prescribe marijuana. That hard
line makes sense for now. But if the Government refuses to
investigate carefully the claims about medical use of marijuana,
it will only spur voters in other states to take the issue into
their own hands.