T
The420Guy
Guest
A controversial proposal that would allow some chronically ill people to
grow marijuana got an airing at the state Capitol Monday, but even its
chief sponsor was uncertain whether the bill would get out of committee
this year.
"I think it'll be a close vote," said state Rep. James W. Abrams,
D-Meriden. The judiciary committee heard testimony Monday and will decide
later this month whether to pass the bill on to the General Assembly for
action.
Under a proposal that Abrams first brought forward last year, people who
suffer from certain chronic or debilitating medical conditions, such as
cancer or HIV, would be able to seek a physician's written certification to
grow a quantity of marijuana deemed "reasonably necessary" to alleviate
painful symptoms. Patients or their caregivers who receive such
certifications would register with the Department of Public Safety.
Abrams said the proposal - prompted by the plight of one of his
constituents - is intended to repair a state law, adopted in 1983, that
allows physicians to prescribe marijuana to cancer and glaucoma patients.
To date, no doctors have done so, largely because there is no place to fill
such prescriptions, and physicians worry that they could be punished under
federal law, which prohibits providing marijuana for medical use, Abrams said.
"The legislature made a policy decision back in 1983, but in a highly
flawed manner," he said. He acknowledged that his proposal wouldn't
override federal law but would "shift the onus" of procuring medicinal
marijuana from doctors to patients.
Eight states, including Alaska, California, Colorado, Maine and Oregon,
permit the medical use of marijuana. Late last week, the Vermont House of
Representatives passed similar legislation, which now faces an uncertain
fate in the Senate.
Monday's hearing drew a handful of people who spoke in favor of the
proposal. Among them was Ned Pocengal of New Haven, who said marijuana had
eased symptoms he suffers from Crohn's disease, HIV and chronic hepatitis B
infection.
"Fortunately, I have found relief ... from one of my medical problems," he
told the committee. "Unfortunately, the best way to alleviate my symptoms
... is currently illegal."
Opponents of the medicinal use of marijuana argue that there are plenty of
prescription drugs available to treat pain, and that it would be tough for
law enforcers to regulate the use of marijuana. Some also say the policy
would promote illegal drug use.
In other business Monday, the judiciary committee heard testimony from
representatives of the nursing home industry who oppose a bill that would
strengthen penalties for abuse or neglect of nursing home residents. The
proposal would make nursing home workers, including managers, subject to
felony charges for failing to provide treatment or services necessary to
the health or safety of residents.
Representatives of the Connecticut Association of Health Care Facilities
and the Connecticut Association of Not-for-Profit Providers for the Aging
testified that the proposal was too broad and vague, and that there are
already sufficient state and federal laws pertaining to abuse of the elderly.
Newshawk: Joe Adams
Pubdate: Tue, 19 Mar 2002
Source: Hartford Courant (CT)
Copyright: 2002 The Hartford Courant
Contact: letters@courant.com
Website: CTNOW: Connecticut Events, Concerts, Attractions, Family Fun and More - CT Now
Details: MapInc
Author: Lisa Chedekel
grow marijuana got an airing at the state Capitol Monday, but even its
chief sponsor was uncertain whether the bill would get out of committee
this year.
"I think it'll be a close vote," said state Rep. James W. Abrams,
D-Meriden. The judiciary committee heard testimony Monday and will decide
later this month whether to pass the bill on to the General Assembly for
action.
Under a proposal that Abrams first brought forward last year, people who
suffer from certain chronic or debilitating medical conditions, such as
cancer or HIV, would be able to seek a physician's written certification to
grow a quantity of marijuana deemed "reasonably necessary" to alleviate
painful symptoms. Patients or their caregivers who receive such
certifications would register with the Department of Public Safety.
Abrams said the proposal - prompted by the plight of one of his
constituents - is intended to repair a state law, adopted in 1983, that
allows physicians to prescribe marijuana to cancer and glaucoma patients.
To date, no doctors have done so, largely because there is no place to fill
such prescriptions, and physicians worry that they could be punished under
federal law, which prohibits providing marijuana for medical use, Abrams said.
"The legislature made a policy decision back in 1983, but in a highly
flawed manner," he said. He acknowledged that his proposal wouldn't
override federal law but would "shift the onus" of procuring medicinal
marijuana from doctors to patients.
Eight states, including Alaska, California, Colorado, Maine and Oregon,
permit the medical use of marijuana. Late last week, the Vermont House of
Representatives passed similar legislation, which now faces an uncertain
fate in the Senate.
Monday's hearing drew a handful of people who spoke in favor of the
proposal. Among them was Ned Pocengal of New Haven, who said marijuana had
eased symptoms he suffers from Crohn's disease, HIV and chronic hepatitis B
infection.
"Fortunately, I have found relief ... from one of my medical problems," he
told the committee. "Unfortunately, the best way to alleviate my symptoms
... is currently illegal."
Opponents of the medicinal use of marijuana argue that there are plenty of
prescription drugs available to treat pain, and that it would be tough for
law enforcers to regulate the use of marijuana. Some also say the policy
would promote illegal drug use.
In other business Monday, the judiciary committee heard testimony from
representatives of the nursing home industry who oppose a bill that would
strengthen penalties for abuse or neglect of nursing home residents. The
proposal would make nursing home workers, including managers, subject to
felony charges for failing to provide treatment or services necessary to
the health or safety of residents.
Representatives of the Connecticut Association of Health Care Facilities
and the Connecticut Association of Not-for-Profit Providers for the Aging
testified that the proposal was too broad and vague, and that there are
already sufficient state and federal laws pertaining to abuse of the elderly.
Newshawk: Joe Adams
Pubdate: Tue, 19 Mar 2002
Source: Hartford Courant (CT)
Copyright: 2002 The Hartford Courant
Contact: letters@courant.com
Website: CTNOW: Connecticut Events, Concerts, Attractions, Family Fun and More - CT Now
Details: MapInc
Author: Lisa Chedekel
