Pubdate: Sat, 30 Jun 2001
Source: Atlanta Journal-Constitution (GA)
Copyright: 2001 Cox Interactive Media.
Contact:  http://www.accessatlanta.com/ajc/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/28
Author: Randy Cohen

EVERYDAY ETHICS: MEDICINAL POT USE ILLEGAL BUT NOT UNETHICAL

Q: I have HIV and use cannabis to alleviate nausea and lack of appetite. A 
friend grows and provides it at no cost. I distribute the remaining 
cannabis to 15 or so other people who either have HIV or are undergoing 
chemotherapy. We all know this is illegal but feel that our lives come 
first. Are we not being ethical?

Anonymous, Virginia

A: I'm with you: What you are doing is illegal but not unethical. Society 
acknowledges a moral right to break the law in extreme circumstances each 
time a sitcom cop pulls over some hapless guy for speeding and asks, "OK, 
buddy, where's the fire?" The implication: If the driver really is racing 
to extinguish a blaze, exceeding the speed limit is acceptable. Similarly, 
medical necessity can trump marijuana laws.

While there are sound arguments for law-abiding behavior even when a law is 
ludicrous, in this situation you harm no one while relieving the suffering 
of the gravely ill who have no alternative remedy --- compelling reasons to 
violate the law.

And you needn't worry that you are implicated in the occasional gunplay of 
the marijuana trade; that violence is a consequence of prohibition, not 
pharmacology, and in any case one would expect the not-for-profit, 
grow-your-own network of medical cannabis suppliers to be insulated from 
the excesses of the commercial trade.

A recent Supreme Court decision confirms marijuana's classification under 
federal law as an illegal Schedule I drug with "no currently accepted 
medical use." Although the ruling does not overturn state statutes --- 
eight states have passed medical marijuana initiatives --- it contradicts 
what many patients and doctors (including the California Medical 
Association) believe. Thus, for you to provide cannabis to the seriously 
ill is not just an act of compassion but also an assertion of truth, albeit 
not one a federal drug enforcement agent would find persuasive.

Q: A professor of sociology, I am editing an anthology with a colleague. I 
accepted, pending revisions, an essay from a young man who phoned to tell 
me how groundbreaking my own work was and in general to stroke my ego. I've 
since discovered that he reviewed a book of mine, calling it just plain bad.

It seems dishonest of him to suck up to me while simultaneously destroying 
my book. May I cut his essay from the anthology or should I refer the 
decision to my co-editor?

L.E., Brooklyn, N.Y.

A: Having tentatively accepted his essay, you ought not reject it because 
the author is a deceiver who hurt your feelings. If editors rejected the 
work of every ill-mannered writer, our nation would face a serious 
literature shortage (not a problem for my editor, of course).

But once you've gone this far, you should take the high road and recuse 
yourself, leaving it to your co-editor to determine the revised essay's 
value or --- with luck --- lack thereof. Were you starting anew, you'd have 
no obligation to accept this young cad's work.

A book is not a public accommodation: It is your project and can be shaped 
by your personal preferences, however quirky. But even then, your 
professional reputation would best be served were you to consider only the 
scholarly qualities of each essay, not the weaselly behavior of its writer. 
His insolence you could vividly describe, if not in the notes on 
contributors, then in your memoirs.

To revile you with one hand and suck up with the other (if that is 
anatomically possible) would be discreditable, but the putative hypocrite 
might see this differently. He may well admire your work in general while 
seeing flaws in your book. Such is the cut and thrust, the kick and kiss, 
of academic life.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Beth