Legalizing Marijuana Laws in the United States - Research Paper Example

INTRODUCTION Marijuana (cannabis sativa) has been cultivated since the ancient period because of its recognized and claimed medicinal value (Cohen, 2006; 2009). The ancient Chinese, the Greeks, the Africans, the Indians and even Medieval Europe have anecdotes attesting to the use of marijuana for maladies ranging from rheumatism, fevers, malaria, dysentery to constipation (Cohen, 2006). Likewise, in the United States, as early as 1840, marijuana has been included in the United States Pharmacopoeia- the official list of recognized medical drugs (Cohen, 2006;2009). It has been in the list from 1850 -1942 and it has been recommended treatment for illnesses one of which is lack of appetite. On the other hand, the practice of recreational smoking of marijuana has started only during the 1920s. It has been introduced by the Mexican migrants, which soon extended to white and black musicians (Cohen, 2009). During the 1930’s Great Depression, Western states has pressured the U.S. government to control marijuana used because of the rising perception and incidents of violence linked with marijuana used (Cohen, 2009). But it should be noted that the widespread use of marijuana happened only during the 1960’s and in 1970 the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Act has entrenched and reaffirmed the 1930’s long standing position that “banned the cultivation, distribution and possession of marijuana for non-medical use” (Mikos, 2009: 1427). And the ban on the non-medical use of marijuana has been extended to the medical use of marijuana by the Controlled Substances Act of 1970 which is a congressional statute that banned marijuana for all purposes. Under this law, marijuana has been categorized as falling under Schedule 1. Schedule 1 category means that “(A) The drug or substance has a high potential for abuse. (B) The drug or substance has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States and (C) There is lack of accepted safety for use of the drug under medical supervision” (Controlled Substances Act 21 U.S.C.) This law preempts all state laws regarding the prohibition of the use of marijuana in all circumstances (Mikos, 2009). However, in 1996, California has started a reform. Proposition 215 more popularly known as the Compassionate Use Act is a legislation adopted in California legalizing marijuana for medical purposes. In a gist, this law “allows residents of California to possess, use, cultivate, and (sometimes) distribute marijuana for medical purposes” (Mikos, 2009: 1428). Currently, there are already 14 states where use of marijuana for medical purposes has been legalized. These are: Alaska, California, Colorado, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Maine, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington. While, Arizona and Maryland has already passed the law legalizing marijuana but did not approved of its used (http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org). In this condition of change, there is a continued ambivalence regarding the legalization of marijuana in the United States. Scholars have recognized the multifaceted aspects of the issue and they do acknowledged that the issue regarding the legalization of marijuana in the United States is an intertwined socio-political, economic, cultural, scientific, moral and legal, issue that cannot just be simply addressed by focusing in just one of its aspects (Cohen, 2006; 2009; Barnes,2009; Mikos, 2009). But, at the same time, it is undeniable that by focusing on some of its aspects, some elements of the issue are clarified (Barnes, 2009). In this regard, the paper aim’s in preseningt the risks and the benefits derived out from legalizing marijuana and from there establish the position of the research regarding the issue of legalization of marijuana laws in the United States. Furthermore, the paper will primarily focus only on the medical use of marijuana. This limitation is set not only on the premise that it can narrow down the topic at hand but it rests on the assumption that first, the issue surrounding medical the use of marijuana is controversial, thus, it necessitates urgent elucidation and clarification (Mikos, 2009; Cohen, 2006;2009). And second, that there exists a distinction between recreational use of marijuana and its medical use. In line with this, the paper will be answering the following questions: 1.What are the risks of using marijuana? 2. What are the benefits of marijuana? 3. Should marijuana laws in the United States be legalized? In this sense, this paper will be having the following structure. The first part is the introduction which presents the historical background of the issue, the aim of the paper, the questions that the paper intends to address and the structure of the paper. The second part discusses the risks associated with marijuana. The third part elucidates the benefits derived from the use of marijuana. Fourth, presents the position of the researcher and finally the conclusion. RISKS OF MARIJUANA Use of drugs or any substances have a positive and a negative effect and marijuana is no different (Cohen, 2006; 2009). The first risk that is always associated with marijuana is death (Cohen, 2009). In a study conducted by Welsh & Martin (2006 as cited in Cohen 2009), they have found out that there is no significant relation between marijuana and death. “Documented evidence of death resulting from recreational use, even in large doses, is lacking” (Cohen, 2009: 55). However, what is observed is that there is an increased change in heart rate and blood pressure but there is not enough empirical evidence linking marijuana with heart attack. Nonetheless, it is acknowledged that taking marijuana in combination with alcohol, and other hard drugs can cause death. Second, marijuana can cause addiction (Cohen , 2009). Claiming that other drugs can also cause addiction does not discount the fact that marijuana is addictive. Third, marijuana causes cognitive impairment (Cohen, 2009). Currently, scholars are in disagreement regarding the neurophysiological extent of damage brought by marijuana. This is based on the supposition that there is insufficient empirical evidence that supports a definitive position on this matter(Cohen, 2009). However, there is an agreement that marijuana aggravates memory dysfunction. Fourth, scientific data suggest that there is a strong association between some forms of psychiatric illness, especially schizophrenia, and marijuana use (Henquet et al, 2005; Boland, 2008; Durrant & Thakker, 2003; Cohen, 2009). Fifth, smoking marijuana can cause lung cancer (Cohen, 2009). This risk should be approached with caution since there is no direct study regarding the claim. This proposition is arrived at via analogy of smoking marijuana with tobacco smoking (Cohen,2009). Finally, marijuana is considered as ‘gateway drug’ (Cohen, 2009). This claim implies that marijuana serves as the trigger for the user to start experimenting with other drugs (Cohen, 2009). These arguments are basically used, to show the intricate connection between crime and drug use which is a media created image with which the public is bombarded. (MacGregor 2000). This normal connotation of illicit drug use as physically and psychologically dangerous and socially destructive presents a strong causal link between illegal drugs, the use of illegal drugs and crime. But that is not the only story. BENEFITS OF MARIJUANA As already mentioned at the beginning of the paper, even during the ancient period, marijuana has already been acknowledged and used to treat and prevent diseases. In the past, it has been used in “easing pain and inducing sleep, and for a soothing influence in nervous disorders. It does not cause constipation nor affect the appetite like opium. It is useful in neuralgia, gout, rheumatism, delirium tremens, insanity, infantile convulsions, insomnia, etc. The tincture helps parturition, and is used in senile catarrh, gonorrhea, menorrhagia, chronic cystitis and all painful urinary affections” (M. Grieve, 1974 as cited in Cohen, 2009:72). However, the problem with these reports is that it is considered as anecdotal stories and as such lacks the objectivity and validity of scientific evidence. In the more recent years, Abrams et al (2007) have conducted a study involving adults with painful HIV-associated sensory neuropathy. Volunteers have been randomly assigned to smoke either marijuana or placebo cigarettes three times a day for five days (Abrams et al, 2007). Abrams et al (2007: 515 -518) have found out that the individual subjects’ quantitative description of chronic pain intensity and the percentage of subjects who reported more than a 30 percent reduction in pain intensity. They found that smoked marijuana reduced daily pain by an average of 34 percent. Over twice as many of the subjects who smoked marijuana reported a significant reduction in pain compared with the placebo group. Pain relief was rapid; the first marijuana cigarette reduced chronic pain by 72 percent while only 15 percent of the placebo group reported immediate relief. No serious adverse events occurred during the study. The authors concluded that “smoked cannabis was well tolerated and effectively relieved chronic neuropathic pain from HIV-associated sensory neuropathy. Other scientific studies have been conducted following the Abrams et al (2007) study. These studies have all found out that marijuana is effective in reducing and mitigating pain and that it is a good alternative for patients who for some reasons are no longer responsive to existing drugs (Cohen, 2006; 2009). In a very recent study, marijuana has been effectual in curbing the side-effects of the treatment for hepatitis C (Sylvestre et al, 2006 as cited in Cohen, 2009: 75). This is a very significant finding since hepatitis C (HCV) is a deadly viral infection. Although current treatment of disease is effective, the severe side –effects of the medication hinder patients from finishing it. In fact, Sylvestre et al (2006 as cited in Cohen, 2009) recommend that “marijuana use may offer symptomatic and virological benefit [a diminished number of disease-producing viruses in the blood] to some patients undergoing HCV treatment by helping them maintain adherence to the challenging medication regimen.” (76) These studies show that there are existing sufficient scientific researches that attest to the effectiveness of marijuana in mitigating pain. Likewise, its success “in the areas of appetite stimulation and cachexia (bodily wasting in the late stages of cancer), AIDS wasting syndrome, nausea and vomiting following anticancer therapy, neurological and movement disorders, multiple sclerosis, pain management, analgesia, and glaucoma” (Cohen, 2006:19 -20; Barnes, 2000) is well documented. In the light of these developments, should marijuana laws in the United States be legalized? LEGALIZATION OF MARIJUANA LAWS IN THE UNITED STATES: AGREE OR DISAGREE As presented in the above discussion, there are risks entailed and benefits derived in the use of marijuana. Though, the paper has made it clear that the focus of the research deals with the medical issue that surrounds the legalization of marijuana, it has been observed that the risks raised against it are all studies whose subjects are recreational users of marijuana. This truism posits a distorted picture of the real effect of marijuana since recreational users have the tendency to over use the substance and use marijuana in large dosage (Cohen, 2006; 2009). In contrast, medical use of marijuana is supervised and regulated (Cohen, 2006;2009). However, despite this limitation and clear disparity, a position has to be made. The researcher believes that medical use of marijuana should be legalized in the United States. This position is held based on the following claims: First, the state has no right to impinge on the right of each and every citizen to avail of treatment that is safe and effective. There are now existing scientific articles that attest to the efficacy of marijuana in curbing and mitigating severe pain and other maladies (eg .Abrams et al, 2007; Sylvestre et al, 2006; Cohen, 2006; 2009). Medical use of marijuana is not just a story or an anecdotal report but is supported by strong scientific evidence, thus, making marijuana a rational option among those who suffer from debilitating illnesses. Furthermore, what makes this right sacrosanct is the fact that it is buttressed by the right of the individual to live their lives in accordance to what they deem is essential in their attaining the good life and to have control over their own bodies in a manner befitting the dignity of a human person (Bernett, 2009). Since, “the essence of justice resides…in the individual” (Mill, 1920 as cited in Bernett, 2009: 32). Second, public perception regarding marijuana is influenced by image created by media (MacGregor, 2000). Unfortunately, this image presents marijuana as closely associated and linked with violence, crimes and mental illnesses (MacGregor, 2000; Boland, 2008; Durrant & Thakker, 2003). Indeed, there are studies that confirm these images. However, there should be a balance between what the person believes to be his/her good and what others think should be the good. Third, in the state of vulnerability, people who are sick are already suffering and should not be made to experience unnecessary suffering anymore (Barnes, 2000). This reality should be upheld at all times especially in the contemporary context of rapid advancements in medical technology. It is ironic that in the light of the advancements in R & D, the government is taking too long in doing the appropriate research that will change the status of marijuana from Schedule 1 to Schedule 2. Fourth, policies should be protecting the people. In fact, the extraordinary caution that the federal government and the Supreme Court display is in fact, intended in protecting the people from developing vain hope from unproven therapeutic claims (Cohen, 2006). However, they have forgotten, that in protecting others, they have not responded to the needs of the actual people who are supposed to be first and foremost protected by the policies – people who are actually vulnerated by maladies and pain. Fifth, there are rational criteria that will help people in understanding the effects of drugs (Nutt et al, 2005). In the Era of Information, people should be given the right information necessary for them in making the rational, autonomous decision. Concealing it from them, is a clear disrespect for their dignity as a person. Finally, nobody has a right to force somebody to prefer something over another thing. Though, there is no assurance that people will always make the right decision, what can be done, instead, is offer alternatives when they want one, when they need one. In the end, medical use of marijuana should be legalized because its benefits far outweigh the risks. CONCLUSION Marijuana laws should be legalized in the United States because there are now enough scientific evidences that support the medical effectiveness of marijuana. But more than that, the right of the individual to chart his own life, to take control over his body and to pursuit the good life in a manner befitting the dignity of a human person should be respected at all times for the essence of justice lies in the individual. REFERENCES: Abrams, Donald I. et al. "Cannabis in Painful HIV-Associated Sensory Neuropathy: A Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial”, NEUROLOGY 68, (2007): 515. Barnes, R. Eric. “Reefer Madness: Legal & Moral Issues Surrounding the Medical Prescription of Marijuana”, Bioethics, Vol. 14, No 1 (2000): 16 – 41. Barnett, Randy E. “The Harmful Side Effects of Drug Prohibition”, Utah Law Review No. 1, (2009): 11 -34. Barnum, David G. “The Supreme Court and Public Opinion: Judicial Decision Making in the Post –New Deal Period”, The Journal of Politics, Vol. 47, No 2 (Jun., 1985): 652 – 666. Boland, P. “British drug policy: Problematizing the distinction between legal drugs and illegal drugs and the definition of the drugs problem”, Probation Journal: The Journal of Community and Criminal Justice, Vol. 55 (2), (2008): 171 -187 Cohen, Peter J. “Medical Marijuana, Compassionate Use and Public Policy: Expert Opinion or Vox Populi?”, Hastings Center Report 36, no. 3 (2006): 19-22. ____________. “Medical Marijuana: The Conflict between Scientific Evidence and Political Ideology”, Utah Law Review No. 1, (2009): 35 – 108. Durrant, Russel . and Thakker, Jo . Substance Use and Abuse. Cultural and Historical Perspectives, pp. 13–33, 59–88 (2003). London: SAGE. Henquet, Cécile et al., Prospective Cohort Study of Cannabis Use, Predisposition for Psychosis, and Psychotic Symptoms in Young People, BRIT. MED. J. 11, 11 (2005): 330. MacGregor, S. ‘Editorial: The Drugs-Crime Nexus’, Drugs: Education ,Prevention and Policy 7,4, (2000) : 311–16. Mikos, Robert A. “On the Limits of Supremacy: Medical Marijuana and the States’ Overlooked Power to Legalize Federal Crime, Vanderbilt Law Review, Vol. 62, N0 5, (2009): 1421 – 1482. Nutt, D., L. King, W. Saulsbury and C. Blakemore “Development of a Rational Scale to Assess the Harm of Drugs of Potential Use”, The Lancet 369: 9566, (2007): 1047–53. 21USC802. Retrieved from www.gpoaccess.gov. Accessed on 2August 2010. Read More