Law wouldn’t be unique

Regarding “Oklahoma’s medical marijuana law would be groundbreaking” (News, June 3): Claims that Oklahoma’s pending medical cannabis access program is unique because it permits physicians broad discretion with regard to which patients may best be treated with medical marijuana are false. In California, where voters approved medical cannabis access 22 years ago, a physician may legally recommend cannabis for “any” illness deemed appropriate by a physician. In Washington state, doctors may recommend cannabis for any “debilitating condition.” The District of Columbia’s medical cannabis program has no qualifying conditions list, and similarly permits physicians sole discretion in making recommendations. Earlier this year, Virginia lawmakers enacted similar, broad language permitting doctors full discretion to recommend cannabis related products for any condition they see fit. Further, society generally allows doctors the broadest of discretion to decide a patient’s ideal health care plan, and state lawmakers seldom seek to interfere in this relationship.

If we entrust physicians the ability to prescribe potentially deadly drugs like opioids, then we should similarly allow them the option to recommend a botanical product that is objectively safer than the litany of pharmaceutical substances it could replace. In short, while some medical cannabis access states do restrict eligible patients to those with specific conditions, several others do not. In this respect, SQ 788 is in fact similar to those of several other states’ long-standing medical programs.

Paul Armentano, Washington, D.C. Armentano is deputy director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML).