20181207.0430

On 1 December 2018, Allie Morris's "Fewer Than 600 Patients Get Medical Cannabis under Restrictive Texas Law" appeared in the online San Antonio Express-News. The article reports on the passage and present enforcement of the 2015 Texas Compassionate Use Act, which permits physicians to prescribe low-concentration cannabidiol to persons diagnosed with particular forms of epilepsy. At present, however, that permission is expressed minimally and unevenly, with the minimum legally allowable number of growers registered (of which one is not in operation) and few physicians registered to make such prescriptions. Additionally, the range of conditions allowing for the prescription is sharply circumscribed. Notably, the difficulty seems to stem from the state Senate and governor, whose opposition to the measure is on record; while there does seem to be popular support for expanding medical use, that is not translating into governmental leadership support.
Working at a substance abuse treatment facility as I do, I have what might be called a professional interest in the laws controlling various substances. No few of the clients my facility sees are referred to us because of issues with marijuana, for example, and there is some sense in which I am concerned about the expansion of legal use; many are referred to us due to criminal proceedings against them for their use of the drug, so opening up that use is like to reduce the number of people who will be sent to my facility for treatment. It is a non-profit organization, to be sure, but the lights still need to be kept on. (Even if it is legalized, though, as alcohol was, we would still get referrals, I think, but not as many.)
At the same time, those who are sent to us for marijuana only or primarily--because clients are not always penalized for all the things they do--seem generally better adjusted than those who are sent to us for other substances only or primarily. If the facility's purpose is to help people address diseases they have, and addiction is a disease, then a disease that is easier to treat and demonstrates fewer adverse symptoms is much less bad a thing to see come into the facility. This is not to say there are not problems--there are; marijuana is not wholly benign, despite its advocates' assertions--but they seem in my experience to be of much lesser scope than those associated with a number of other substances. Further, the research seems clear that medical marijuana has benefits for people in a number of situations; it can be misused, certainly, but most prescribed (and many over the counter) medicines can, as well. Nor am I ignorant of the racist underpinnings of the laws that criminalized marijuana in the first place, even if many are or claim to be.
There is more to think on in the piece, to be sure. Issues of enforcement ethics come to mind, as well as the slippery slope that threatens to open in any such discussion. That there are such things makes Morris's a good piece of reporting.