Monday hearing may determine fate of Colorado’s medical marijuana dispensaries
Friday, July 17th, 2009 at 12:20 pm | By: Radical Russ
(Denver Daily News) The health department on Monday will consider making things a bit more complicated for [Andy] Cookston’s [Cannabis Medical] caregiving operation, which he operates with his wife, Lori. On Monday, the Board of Health will vote on a proposal that would limit caregivers to five patients, as well as require them to provide so-called “significant care,” like cooking, cleaning and scrubbing toilets.
“That means you’ll have another illegal market to deal with,” starts Cookston, still standing in the printing portion of his store. “If they limit growth, a guy like me is not going to let down 15 people in wheelchairs. I’m not going to do it.”
The whole issue has Brian Vicente, executive director of pro-medical marijuana group Sensible Colorado, smoking mad.
“Could you imagine if your doctor instructed you to use a medication, but when you went to pick it up your pharmacist said, ‘Sorry, I’ve already helped five people today?’” asked Vicente, who also serves as counsel to Cookston.
Dispensaries have shot up across Colorado since President Obama took office and eased federal crackdowns on medical marijuana growing and dispensing operations. It’s estimated that more than 40 dispensaries are operating legally across Colorado, according to Vicente. Of those, at least 10 are in Denver. Many more operate underground. And perhaps even worse, some of the more than 7,600 patients seek street dealers.
Concerns are being raised that if the health department imposes the new regulations, more patients would look to the street, or certainly to dispensaries forced to go underground.
Board of Health public hearing on proposed changes to the Medical Marijuana Registry Program:
WHEN: Monday, 9 a.m.
WHERE: Tivoli Student Union, Conference Room 250, 900 Auraria Parkway, on the Auraria Campus
Much of this controversy stems from the definition of a “caregiver” – what does it mean to give care to a seriously sick or disabled person? The state wants you to believe that caregiving is akin to being a Certified Nurses Assistant – taking vitals, dispensing medicine, cooking, cleaning, bathing the patient, etc. and if you want to be picky about it, that is a proper definition in historical context.
But with medical marijuana, “caregiver” is a placeholder term for someone who assists in the growing, preparation, and dispensing of medical marijuana, because the term you would normally use for such a person – “pharmacist” – is unavailable to us due to the federal prohibition on cannabis. Or the other term you might use – “dealer” – is inappropriate because the grower and seller of the cannabis is doing so legally and not for profit.
I think much of this controversy could have been avoided if we had been able to pass medical marijuana initiatives with the term “gardener”. Obviously the marijuana needs to be grown, harvested, and packaged before the patient can use it, which really means the only thing the “caregiver” if giving care towards is a plant, not a person.
Now, to be fair, most of the Colorado dispensary owners I met in Aspen are actually providing holistic caregiving services, like massage therapy, counseling, grocery services, and so on. I say a rose by any other name would still smell as sweet – whether we call them “caregivers”, “growers”, or “dispensaries”, they are providing a critical health care service, and as such, the Colorado health department should avoid getting caught up in the distinctions of terminology and focus on the good being done by the caregivers involved. Accept that the people of Colorado support medical access to marijuana, accept that some sort of business – underground or legit – is going to arise to serve that need, and work with the caregivers to craft sensible and responsible ordinances that protect the patients and the state.
Topics: caregiver, Colorado, Denver, dispensaries
I like compassion garden tender, and then shorten to c.g.t. there could be cgt licenses or patients could designate a someone to be their primary cgt, etc
Russ, I appreciate your point that the definition of caregivers should not get in the way of medical marijuana. California and other states have a great division of Social Services called In Home Supportive Services (IHSS). This program pays near minimum wage to ordinary, unskilled people to become “care providers” for the poor elderly and disabled. These care providers are paid to do only the things the patient can’t for theirselves, like cleaning, cooking, or help with bathing or dressing. With this efficient process, they can stay in their homes and avoid expensive nursing facilities.
The distance between the term “care providers” and “caregivers” is too small to measure. Care givers are anyone who gives needed care, period.
———————————————–
Also, I’d like to give a heads up to what may be the new prohibitionist campaign to counter the great progress we’re making in mariuana reform. — MARIJUANA IS ADDICTIVE! — a slick article featuring three “marijuana addicts” is launched at the New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/19/fashion/19pot.html?_r=1&scp=3&sq=Richard%20N.%20%20Rosenthal&st=cse
Here is my rebuttal posted at Yahoo Groups Drug Policy Forum (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/drugpolicyforum/messages)
In this sermon on “marijuana addiction,” the NYT focuses on two or three people they found that have problems associated with heavy, chronic mariuana use. Never mind these people likely represent a fraction of one percent of America’s 50 million marijuana consumers. Never mind the other 99.5 percent of consumers who don’t have these problems. Anyway, let’s take a closer look at these “marijuana addicts.”
The Times says 52-year-old Joyce “found herself hiding her addiction from her family, friends and co-workers. “I would come home from work, close my door, have my bong, my food, my music and my dog, and I wouldn’t see another person until I went to work the next day,”"
So, her big problem is that marijuana made her a hermit after getting off work. However, it doesn’t say marijuana ever caused her any health problems, or any problems doing her job. Could it be it was marijuana prohibition that made her feel she had to live a life in isolation? If she had not been the target of the great American Witch Hunt, isn’t it probable she would have instead enjoyed a normal social life where she could be open about her marijuana use? Seems likely to me.
Then we are presented with Milo, of whom they say, “is trying to quit, because his girlfriend is threatening to leave him. Besides, the drug no longer alleviates his depression and anxiety. “I’m losing things and people,” Milo said after the meeting. “I’m estranged from my children. I’ve lost two houses, and I’m living in my R.V., basically homeless.”
I know lots of people who live in their RVs. I wouldn’t call them homeless. I plan to do a lot of that myself after I retire. Intolerant girlfriends and wives are a big source of marijuana consumers’ problems. This is usually because these ladies are averse to living a “criminal” lifestyle. It’s hard to blame them. Nobody enjoys living the life of a secretive fugitive. Women are generally more social creatures than men and most can’t bear going through life as “pariahs.” – But none of this is marijuana’s fault. Again, this is a tragic result of marijuana prohibition.
There are few wives of successful, well-adjusted men who would harp on their husbands for having a glass of wine in the evenings. And I doubt very seriously that marijuana caused Milo to lose his houses and children. Never mind any underlying issues that are likely the real cause of Milo’s problems. His heavy marijuana use is likely a symptom of his inability to keep his priorities straight. — Because marijuana “no longer alleviates his depression and anxiety,” it doesn’t indict marijuana as a bad thing. It just means those problems have become so profound in his life, they are now beyond the ability of marijuana to erase.
Finally, we are presented with Jonathan James. The NYT says:
“Marijuana helped inspire some of his most original ideas. But Mr. James is afraid to stop smoking, even after kicking heroin and cocaine. When he stopped the harder drugs, he stayed off pot for six months. When he started again, he planned to smoke only a few times a week. — After a month or so, “I started smoking it more,” he said. “Two months later, I was smoking it in the morning, and four months later I was smoking all day.” — He said he would be more successful without pot. — “It keeps me back — from engaging in the dreams and aspirations I have,” he said. “I would like to feel I don’t need to take anything to feel better.”
Marijuana is not only enjoyable for James, but it has been a source of his creativity as a choreographer. He doesn’t seem to have any real complaint other than offering the vague idea that without marijuana, he would be more successful. Perhaps he would. But perhaps he is just looking for something to blame for hitting the cieling of creativity in his job. This could just be burnout. Maybe what James really needs is to go into a new field. This is common with artistic folks.
So, in these three individuals cherry-picked by the NYT, it’s not clear at all their “problems” are due to marijuana. In the first two cases, it is clearly marijuana prohibition that is the aggravating factor. In the third, it’s apparent there are deeper, underlying factors to consider.
Interspersed with these dubious “marijuana addicts” is the usual prohibitionist clap-trap about the ‘menace’ of the new “super-potent” pot! Never mind most pot is not really much more potent than it ever was, or that we’ve always had high THC cannabis in the form of hash, or that more potent pot is a GOOD THING, since people have to smoke less of it than low potency herb. Somehow, the higher potency is supposed to drag consumers into smoking more than they want – making ADDICTS out of them. Give me a break!
Amazingly, the NYT admits that most marijuana consumers in “treatment” are ordered into it by the courts or parents. How much do you want to bet the majority of the remainder were goaded into it by their wives or girlfriends? 8^)
The NYT’s other big hammer is NIDA “addiction specialist,” Dr. Nora Volkow, who is notorious for twisting statistics and research to give a scientific hue to their propaganda. She says:
“People thought cocaine was a very benign drug.” – Only after the basketball player Len Bias died of a cocaine overdose in 1986, and the crack epidemic began, did the government start a campaign to warn of cocaine’s dangers. – With marijuana, “it’s going to take some real fatalities for people to pay attention,” she said. “Unfortunately that’s the way it goes.”
Never mind we have thousands of years with millions of consumers and haven’t had a fatality from marijuana yet. As soon as we do, we’ll realize marijuana is just as dangerous as cocaine!
Get your NYT fishwrapper here! — There must be cartel interests on the NYT board of directors. What else would explain this garbage coming from the nation’s “flagship” of journalism?