Marijuana Misconceptions! Know the Facts!

"I would not be a fantastic attorney unless I prefaced this information by disclaimers:

1) Marijuana is still a controlled schedule I substance and it is illegal inside eyes with the Federal Government with the United States;

2) This article is to not be construed as legal counsel, nor is supposed to take the place in the advice of an attorney, and you should talk to legal counsel before thinking about actions in furtherance from the material of this information. Ok, let's begin.

In the month of November, the State of Arizona passed Proposition 203, which could exempt certain people from controlled substances laws within the State of Arizona. However, it's going to still take the time before medical cannabis is implemented as policy in Arizona. The Arizona Department of Health Services has released a proposed timeline for that drafting from the rules all around the implementation of Proposition 203. So far, necessities such as important periods of time that you should paid close attention to:

December 17, 2010: The first draft in the medical marijuana rules ought to be released generating designed for reply to this date.

January 7, 2011: This will probably be the deadline for public comment on the initial draft of rules stated earlier.

January 31, 2011: The second draft with the rules will be released about this date. Once again, it will be available for informal comment as inside draft described above.

February 21 to March 18, 2011: More formal public hearings will probably be held in regards to the proposed rules at the moment, then the ultimate rules will probably be listed in the Secretary of State making public around the Office of Administrative Rules website.

April 2011: The medical marijuana rules go into effect and become published in the Arizona Administrative Register.

It is important that constantly through the entire consultation process, interested parties submit briefs and/or make oral presentations when permitted. Groups with interests contrary to that regarding medicinal marijuana advocates are often making presentations, and might convince the State to unnecessarily restrict the substance or people that may qualify to get into it if you have no voice to advocate in support of patients' rights.

Some tips about Proposition 203's effects

-Physicians may prescribe medical cannabis for his or her patients under certain conditions. ""Physician"" is not defined you might say restricted to normal medical professionals. Osteopaths licensed under Title 32, Chapter 17; naturopaths licensed under Title 32, Chapter 14; and homeopaths licensed under Title 32, Chapter 29 may all be permitted recommend marijuana for their patients.

-In order to get prescribed medicinal marijuana, an individual should be a ""qualifying patient."" A qualifying patient is described as someone who has been diagnosed by a ""physician"" (as defined above) as using a ""debilitating condition.""

-Debilitating health concerns include:

* Cancer, glaucoma, HIV positive status, AIDS, hepatitis C, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, Crohn's disease, or agitation of Alzheimer's disease or perhaps the management of these conditions.

* A chronic or debilitating disease or condition or its treatment who makes more than one of the following: Cachexia or wasting syndrome; severe and chronic pain; severe nausea; seizures, including those characteristic of epilepsy; or severe and persistent muscle spasms, including those characteristic of multiple sclerosis.

* Any other medical problem or its treatment added from the Department of Health Services pursuant to Section 36-2801.01.

This last qualifying condition is underlined because it's important through the rulemaking process. Although Proposition 203 allows for the public to petition the Department of Health Services to exercise its discretion to add conditions under this, bureaucracy is notoriously rare to find to switch any law. The initial discretionary rules for additional treatments could possibly be exercised throughout the public consultations that occur between December and March, though this is just not certain.

It is therefore essential that, inside event that digging in health concerns is regarded as in the consultations, any stakeholder wishing for any condition unlisted in the first 2 bulleted items above to lobby during the public consultation periods to the Department to provide the excess problem to the set of debilitating medical conditions. In order to boost the prestige of any presentations built to justify adding medical conditions under Section 36-2801.01, it can be helpful to solicit the testimony of sympathetic Arizona-licensed medical doctors who can testify in writing and also at the general public hearings about why the proposed condition must be added. Documents showing that other jurisdictions, both within the United States and elsewhere, currently use marijuana being a treatment for the proposed condition could be helpful, as would medical journals on the subject.

It needs to be remembered that despite his cheery YouTube videos about the medical marijuana rule drafting process, Director of Health Services Will Humble wrote a submission in opposition for the passing of Proposition 203. He managed it for the grounds that the FDA will not test the drug, and although the federal government's anti-marijuana policy is well-known it should not be trusted as a possible authority for unbiased medical cannabis research. There is no reason to believe that Director Humble will likely be any less inclined to obstruct the use of medical marijuana through the rulemaking stage, and all sorts of proponents of medicinal marijuana must be sure to make their voices heard with the consultations in order to avoid the obstruction from the intent of Proposition 203.

Extent of Rulemaking during Consultations

There are other provisions in Proposition 203 which is going to be discussed throughout the initial rulemaking process, and they will likely to end up the main objective with the consultations. The consultations will create rules:

* Governing the way in which the Department of Health Services will accept the petitions from people mentioned before, regarding adding medical conditions for the list from the already enshrined debilitating health concerns.

* Establishing the design and content of registration and renewal applications submitted beneath the medicinal marijuana law.

* Governing the way in which the Department will consider applications for and renewals of medicinal marijuana ID cards.

* Governing various aspects around the newly legalized nonprofit medical marijuana dispensaries, including recordkeeping, security, oversight, as well as other requirements.

* Establishing the fees for patient applications and medical marijuana dispensary applications.

The most important part from the consultation period will be regarding the rules governing the establishment and oversight of medical marijuana dispensaries. If interest groups lobby the Department to produce the recordkeeping, security, oversight, as well as other requirements around dispensaries too restrictive, it's going to have the result of reducing the option of medical cannabis to patients and driving in the cost of medical cannabis due on the not enough supply. It could simply become very expensive to comply with all from the regulations.

During this stage, it is vital that stakeholders-particularly medicinal marijuana dispensaries from out-of-state, and perhaps pharmacists with a bit of economic knowledge-submit briefs explaining why certain proposed rules will have a negative effect about the patients this Proposition should really help. The proposed rules have never emerge yet, however, if they are doing, they should be closely scrutinized to the possible negative impact that unnecessarily tough security and recordkeeping on nonprofit dispensaries may have on patients.

The other major factor inside the rulemaking should do using the fees. The Department is going to be setting fees for medical cannabis dispensaries throughout the consultation period. Proposition 203 provides that this fees might not exactly exceed $5,000 per initial application, and $1,000 per renewal. However, by incorporating lobbying throughout the public consultation, you'll be able that this actual fees will be much less as these are merely the utmost that this Department may charge.

Discrimination against Medical Marijuana Users

Under Proposition 203, discrimination against medical marijuana users will probably be prohibited in specific situations. Based on our analysis, an individual may not:

* As a school or landlord, refuse to enroll someone or else penalize them solely because of their status as a medical cannabis cardholder, unless not doing so would result inside the loss of a monetary or licensing related benefit under federal law or regulations.

* As an employer, discriminate against hiring someone, or terminate them or impose any conditions to them because they're a medical marijuana cardholder, unless not doing this would result in the lack of a monetary or licensing related benefit under federal law or regulations. Employers can always terminate employees when the employee is possessing or impaired by marijuana about the premises from the where you work or during the hours of employment.

* As a health care bills provider, discriminate against a cardholder, including in matters of organ transplants. Medical marijuana has to be treated as any other medication prescribed with a physician.

* Be prevented, as being a cardholder, from having visitation custody or visitation or parenting time with a minor, unless the cardholder's behavior ""creates an unreasonable danger for the safety in the minor as established by clear and convincing evidence.""

Although there are specific prohibitions on discrimination, there's also provisions which permit discrimination against medical cannabis cardholders:

* Government medical assistance programs and personal health insurers are certainly not required to reimburse somebody for medical cannabis use.

* Nobody who possesses property, including business owners, is necessary to allow medical marijuana on their premises (this seemingly includes landlords who, but they cannot refuse tenants based on the being a cardholder, are permitted in order to avoid cardholders from bringing marijuana on the landlord's property).

* Employers aren't needed to allow cardholders to be within the influence of or ingest marijuana while working, although the presence of marijuana inside body which just isn't of the sufficient concentration to cause impairment does not establish being underneath the influence of it.

Rules Related to the Establishment of Dispensaries

Although the last rules around security, recordkeeping, as well as other requirements for medical cannabis dispensaries won't be established until April 2011, there are particular requirements that happen to be enshrined in Proposition 203 itself and may be known ahead in the time that the last rules emerge. These minimal requirements may well not be as restrictive as the final requirements that happen to be published in April 2011.

* Medical marijuana dispensaries should be nonprofit. They will need to have bylaws which preserve their nonprofit nature, though they desire not considered tax-exempt from the IRS, nor must they be incorporated.

* The operating documents from the dispensaries must include provisions to the oversight in the dispensary and for accurate recordkeeping.

* The dispensary must have just one secure entrance and must implement appropriate security measures to deter which will help prevent the theft of marijuana and unauthorized use of areas containing marijuana.

* A dispensary mustn't acquire, possess, cultivate, manufacture, deliver, transfer, transport, supply, or dispense marijuana for just about any purpose besides providing it straight to a cardholder or a registered caregiver for the cardholder.

* All cultivation of marijuana need to take place only in a locked, enclosed facility in a home address provided for the Department of Health Services in the application process, and accessible only by dispensary agents registered using the Department.

* A dispensary can get marijuana from a patient of their caregiver, but only when the patient or caregiver receives no compensation for it.

* No utilization of marijuana is permitted about the property of the dispensary.

* A dispensary is at the mercy of reasonable inspection with the Department of Health Services. The Department must first give reasonable notice in the inspection to the dispensary.

Comparison to California's Medical Marijuana Law

The Arizona law is simply by no means the same because law in California. There are certainly some differences involving the two, though in certain respects they're comparable. This is a comparative analysis with the two laws.

Similarities:

* Both laws, like a practical matter, enable broad discretion around the part of your physician to prescribe marijuana to patients that are suffering from pain. In the Arizona law, ""severe and chronic pain"" may be the legislated standard. In the California law, any ""chronic or persistent medical symptom"" that substantially limits the life span in the patient to conduct more than one major life activities as defined through the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, or that when not alleviated, will result in serious harm to the patient's physical or mental safety, qualifies.

* Both laws have a number of illnesses which can be automatically considered qualifying illnesses for the prescription of medicinal marijuana. These include, but usually are not tied to, AIDS, cachexia, cancer, glaucoma, persistent muscle spasms, seizures, and severe nausea.

* Both laws need the use associated with an identification card by those that have been prescribed medical marijuana, after the cardholders already went through a a primary application process when the use from the wendover weed store drug has become recommended with a physician.

* Both states do not factor in the unusable portion of the marijuana plant in determining the maximum weight of marijuana that is permissible for possession with a cardholder.

Differences:

* Though the rules have not been finalized, the Arizona law appears as though it'll be regulated on the state level and so uniform across Arizona. The California law, however, is regulated significantly on the municipal level, and therefore the rules around dispensaries can differ greatly from one municipality for the next.

* The Arizona law offers a broader spectrum of folks that are believed a ""physician"" for that purpose of prescribing medicinal marijuana. In California, only physicians and osteopaths are viewed to become physicians. In Arizona, as well as medical professionals and osteopaths, naturopaths and homeopaths is likewise able to prescribe medical marijuana.

* In California, patients or their caregivers may grow marijuana plants in place of utilizing a medical cannabis dispensary. In Arizona, patients may only grow marijuana or designate someone else to do so instead of going to a dispensary for the condition that there is no dispensary operating within 25 miles from the patient's home.

* The maximum possession limit for marijuana in California is eight ounces per patient, whereas the limit is only 2.5 ounces per patient in Arizona.

"