Cannabis News Media Awareness Project
  State Talks Marijuana
Posted by FoM on March 18, 2002 at 07:03:27 PT
By Marian Gail Brown 
Source: Connecticut Post 

medical Right before dinner, Joseph Cappello lit up a joint and drew in the smoke deep enough to burn his throat, lungs and send his frail body into a shaking coughing fit. It was the first time the 69-year-old Connecticut man, diagnosed with leukemia, had ever smoked marijuana. It was also the last time.

"He tried it. But he didn't really like it. Then again, he only smoked it once," said son Michael Cappello of Milford, a staunch supporter of legalizing marijuana in Connecticut for medicinal uses.

"My dad was hoping the pot might help bring back his appetite and suppress the nausea he had from all of the chemotherapy."

Today the General Assembly's Judiciary Committee is likely to hear a lot of stories similar to Cappello's when it convenes a public hearing on legalizing marijuana to treat patients who are stricken with life-threatening conditions and diseases such as cancer or AIDS.

No doubt the testimony will be heart-wrenching. Michael Cappello describes himself as a witness to his father's rapid physical decline -- first from leukemia itself, then from the side effects of chemotherapy.

"My dad was a robust kind of guy," Cappello said. "He was always outdoors, running his landscaping business. He had a full head of silver hair, and he always looked healthy."

Joseph Cappello, a roofer and then later owner of his own landscaping company, was 5-foot-7 and weighed 200 pounds. He had a muscular, somewhat stocky build. Within months of starting chemotherapy, Cappello shed about 60 pounds and was anxious to try a drug that he hoped would restore his appetite and indirectly his strength.

A 1983 state law has allowed physicians to prescribe marijuana for their patients. As far as the Fairfield County Medical Association knows, no Connecticut doctor has ever prescribed marijuana for anyone, said Mark Thompson, a spokesman for the association, which represents more than 2,000 physicians.

"My understanding is that physicians in Connecticut have the ability to prescribe marijuana now," Thompson said. "But no one's ever availed themselves of it. Besides there are other synthetic drugs that are just as good or better than the active ingredient in marijuana for controlling pain."

State Rep. James Abrams, D-Meriden, who is the sponsor of the medicinal marijuana bill, said he was motivated to do so after hearing the plight of one of his constituents.

"There she was trying to care for her young son who was battling cancer," Abrams said. "And she was out trying to procure marijuana to ease his nausea and help him gain back his appetite."

Since 1996, eight states have stricken criminal penalties for patients who use, possess or grow medical marijuana with their doctor's approval. In addition to Connecticut, Vermont and Maryland also are considering similar laws.

Under Abrams' bill, patients who have physician approval could grow marijuana, but only indoors and only in a small enough quantity to treat their condition.

"The problem with the 1983 law is that it isn't workable," Abrams said. "Physicians are afraid of getting arrested by the feds if they prescribe marijuana."

Under the federal Controlled Substances Act, marijuana is classified as a schedule I drug. That designation, which has remained unchanged since 1970, means marijuana has "no accepted medical use" and represents a "high potential for abuse."

In a unanimous decision last May, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected the idea that medical need for pot could be a defense in federal court. However, that ruling is considered a narrow one because only a handful of small-time marijuana growers or users ever find themselves in federal court. For large-scale cannabis cooperatives that supply marijuana to patients, it could mean a shutdown of their operation.

Criminal defense attorney Mickey Sherman of Stamford recalls a case from the early 1990s that involved a client with cancer who faced criminal charges for marijuana possession.

"The state's attorney was sympathetic to her," Sherman said, and the charges eventually were dismissed.

Despite that experience, Sherman believes that legalizing marijuana for medicinal uses is a mistake.

"Even though I'm considered to be this radical criminal defense lawyer," Sherman said, "I see problems with this bill.

"To segregate marijuana for medical purposes from recreational uses is problematic for a number of reasons. You'll get a lot of bogus doctors and agencies giving out scripts for marijuana to anybody under the guise of it being to treat some kind of illness," Sherman said. "And the administrative aspects and the regulation of such a law are going to be impossible to deal with or to ever totally control."

What about decriminalizing marijuana altogether?

"I've just seen too many people abuse it for one thing," Sherman said. "I've been witness to the collective negative effect it's had on their lives whether they are young or old."

Source: Connecticut Post (CT)
Author: Marian Gail Brown
Published: Monday, March 18, 2002
Copyright: 2002 MediaNews Group, Inc
Contact: edit@ctpost.com.
Website: http://www.ctpost.com/

Medical Marijuana Information Links
http://freedomtoexhale.com/medical.htm

CannabisNews Medical Marijuana Archives
http://cannabisnews.com/news/list/medical.shtml


Home    Comment    Email    Register    Recent Comments    Help

 
Comment #5 posted by RavingDave on March 18, 2002 at 23:26:37 PT
Don't forget...
"Under the federal Controlled Substances Act, marijuana is classified as a schedule I drug. That designation, which has remained unchanged since 1970, means marijuana has 'no accepted medical use' and represents a 'high potential for abuse.'"

Don't forget the often-omitted third qualification for Schedule I substances - that they be potentially fatal. Marijuana has to be the least fatal of any of the illicit substances listed in the CSA. I believe the only documented case of a fatal pot accident was some guy in Dubuque who choked on a Twinkie.

In any case, this makes pot 0 for 3 in prerequisites for classification under CSA Schedule I. But, never let the law stand in the way of an oppressive legislature.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #4 posted by FoM on March 18, 2002 at 09:10:20 PT
O'Frank
Fixed!

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #3 posted by Gary Storck on March 18, 2002 at 09:01:42 PT
Incorrect email add
FYI, I tried to send an LTE to the email add for the Post but it bounced. I called them and was given this one: edit@ctpost.com.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #2 posted by project419 on March 18, 2002 at 08:55:59 PT
What?
I've just seen too many people abuse it for one thing," Sherman said. "I've been witness to the collective negative effect it's had on their lives whether they are young or old."

That's because it's illegal...we wouldn't be abusing it...if it were legal and perfectly normal to do.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #1 posted by Dark Star on March 18, 2002 at 07:44:20 PT
Wrong Drug
"I've just seen too many people abuse it for one thing," Sherman said. "I've been witness to the collective negative effect it's had on their lives whether they are young or old."

If he were discussing alcohol, I'd believe this. As it is, he is a victim of prevailing propaganda. Of course, cannabis can be medicine, and the benefits will always outweigh the (minimal) risks in the broad scheme.

[ Post Comment ]


  Post Comment
Name:        Password:
E-Mail:

Subject:

Comment:   [Please refrain from using profanity in your message]

Link URL:
Link Title:


Return to Main Menu


So everyone may enjoy this service and to keep it running, here are some guidelines: NO spamming, NO commercial advertising, NO flamming, NO illegal activity, and NO sexually explicit materials. Lastly, we reserve the right to remove any message for any reason!

This web page and related elements are for informative purposes only and thus the use of any of this information is at your risk! We do not own nor are responsible for visitor comments. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 and The Berne Convention on Literary and Artistic Works, Article 10, news clippings on this site are made available without profit for research and educational purposes. Any trademarks, trade names, service marks, or service names used on this site are the property of their respective owners. Page updated on March 18, 2002 at 07:03:27