Upon August 29, 2013, the Federal Department of Proper rights issued a memorandum saying it will carry on and count on state and indigenous authorities to address pot activity through enforcement of state narcotics laws. However, because of new express laws enabling possession of a tiny amounts of pot and regulating production, refinement and sale of pot, the Department designated ten standards to guide express law enforcement. States must (1) prevent the circulation of marijuana to children; (2) prevent earnings from the sale of pot from flowing to unlawful enterprises; (3) prevent the diversion of marijuana from states where it is legal to states where it is illegal; (4) prevent marijuana activity from being used as a cover for the trafficking of other illegitimate drugs; (5) prevent violence and the use of guns in the cultivation and distribution of marijuana; (6) prevent drugged driving and the exacerbation of other adverse public health implications associated with marijuana use; (7) avoid the growth of marijuana on public countries; and (8) prevent cannabis possession or use on federal property. In the event the Federal Government determines that States are not keeping to such criteria, the Federal Government reserves the directly to challenge Condition laws. The Feds failed to say how any of that was to performed. They simply said the states should do that. But Florida has obviously been looking the other way. Sarasota medical marijuana doctor
The modern Law
Found in passing CS/CS/SB 1030, Fl has missed some key issues. Consider, for occasion, the new law, which has the following features:
It makes “low-THC cannabis” legal when approved with a medical doctor or osteopathic physician for a patient who has certain medical conditions. Which conditions? Cancer, seizures, severe or persistent muscle spasms. Appears clear enough. Here’s where the Florida Legislature determined to go off track-
The patient is considered qualified to receive this treatment if (among other things), the patient is a long lasting person of Florida and the doctor determines that the hazards of ordering the container are reasonable. How will a physician see whether the patient is an everlasting citizen? Is there any safeguard to make that decision in good faith? Nope. Just how does a physician make the reasonableness determination? Can be the study of cannabis use even section of the medical school curriculum? Number
Amazingly, the Florida Medical Relationship and the Florida Osteopathic Medical Association have responsibility, starting October, 1, 2014, to educate prescribing medical professionals via an eight hour education course. How the Legislature decided to spend that function to the FMA and FOMA, why they even want that task (beyond collecting not dues revenues) and how the drafters created 8-10 hours (does which include normal water and bathroom breaks? ) is a wonder. And how such training belongs at all to the daily medical practice of the physicians taking such a course is also absent. Can an orthopedist undertake it? Sure. What about a pathologist? You wager. A dermatologist? Not a problem. How come would a successful, training physician decide to follow the brand new way? How is that the “highest and best use” for an excellently trained cardiologist, family practitioner or anesthesiologist? Assessing a patient with cancer or who has awful seizures who might benefit from medical marijuana requires no more than an eight hour course? I think it required training in internal remedies, neurology and… cancer. Thus, is this a clinically, clinically driven law created to help people in need or the one which just makes sure everyone gets their piece of the curry? It seems to pass up the mark.