Where I Stand -- Mike O'Callaghan: A close look at Q9

"YOU'RE SURE AGAINST legalizing marijuana. That's always been your stand," were the remarks of a longtime reader. These were her opening remarks when discussing Question 9 to appear on our ballots this fall. She was shocked when I paused before engaging her in a deeper conversation about the subject. I haven't gone soft on the use of dangerous drugs and narcotics but can't find in my heart a definite NO to Question 9.

Sun reporters will put together the opinions of people both for and against Q9 so our readers can come to their own intelligent conclusions. Q9 is condensed to read "Shall the Nevada Constitution be amended to allow the possession and use of a part of the genus Cannabis (marijuana) for the treatment or alleviation of certain illnesses upon advice of a physician, to require parental consent for such use by minors, and to authorize appropriate methods of supply to patients authorized to use it?"

There is good reason to believe that this is just one more gimmick designed by the shaggy and unkempt remnants of the 1960s to begin legally growing and selling more pot for their street customers. There's little reason to doubt that this is exactly what some Q9 supporters have in mind. This makes Q9 a legitimate target for people involved in preventive law enforcement activities. The federal agents have already challenged the marijuana law passed by California voters.

People arguing for its passage view marijuana as a valuable pain reliever for some illnesses. Opponents quickly argue that the same pain relief can be found in narcotics and drugs already being prescribed by physicians. Being that even more deadly and addictive drugs can now be legally prescribed by physicians, why can't the same rules apply to prescribing marijuana? Is the answer because it can be raised and distributed so easily in almost any area of the United States?

In an explanation for Q9 we are told that the plant can only be prescribed by physicians for "the treatment or alleviation of cancer; glaucoma; acquired immunodeficiency syndrome; severe, persistent nausea or cachexia resulting from these or other chronic or debilitating medical conditions; epilepsy and other disorders characterized by seizure; multiple sclerosis and other disorders characterized by muscle spasticity; or other conditions approved by law for such treatment."

In addition to this, according to the explanations, the doctor would also have to have parental consent for use by a minor. The explanation goes on to inform us, "The proposed amendment would provide for a confidential registry of patients authorized to use the plan which would be available only to law enforcement officials; would authorize appropriate methods of supply to authorized patients; and would protect plant and property related to the plant's use from forfeiture except on conviction or a guilty or nolo contendere plea of unauthorized possession or use."

If the use of marijuana, under the above conditions, is approved the next step should require that the supply of the plant come from controlled and licensed growers. This can act to keep the reckless marijuana cult from becoming wealthy at the expense of society.

At this time, I don't have any of the illnesses that marijuana could be used to relieve pain. Nevertheless, if there are people out there who would have less pain by using it, then they should have it. A Journal of the American Medical Association editorial had a long discussion about pain management in its June 17, 1998, issue which told us, "Treatment of pain should be a top priority in cancer care. However, excellence in pain control and symptom management has not been adopted as a 'mission' of cancer practitioners, probably for several reasons. First, patients do not die of pain, although some evidence suggests that untreated pain begets worse pain."

A study discussed in the same JAMA issue informed us that the "relationship between depression and pain may suggest that elderly patients with depression are more sensitive to pain caused by the coexisting physical condition, as others have concluded."

When thinking about pain management and ways to legally control the use of marijuana, I'm not only forced to pause before saying NO to Q9, but will probably vote for its passage. That's unless somebody can convince me I'm way off track and out of touch with reality.

archive