Pubdate: Tue, 03 Sep 2002 Source: St. Petersburg Times (FL) Section: Pasco County Copyright: 2002 St. Petersburg Times Contact: http://www.sptimes.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/419 Author: Christopher J. Martino PAIN CONTROL IS NOT DRUG DEALING Re: Richard Paey case Editor: There is evidence of injustice to Richard Paey. Richard is a graduate of the University of Pennsylvania Law School who suffered a severe physical setback with damage to his lumbar spine and postoperative complications. The ensuing pain created a medical need for pain control. This was never accomplished by the treating physicians, and issues have been raised with respect to his acquisition of additional pain control substances. The quantity of substance which he acquired fell under state statutes regarding possession of controlled substances and a subsequent trial led to a 25-year mandatory minimum sentence. Important issues need to be brought to light in this circumstance. Richard Paey's present age of 43 years would make him eligible to leave prison at age 68. If one were to take into account concurrent medical illness, it is very unlikely that he will survive to that age. This then would constitute a life sentence. Pain management in this country has been woefully inadequate and continues to be so. This has been recognized at the federal level. One can acquire from any hospital administrator information used in the accreditation of hospitals to maintain a licensure. A fifth vital sign is now considered to be pain. Adequate control of pain is a mandate for a hospital to maintain its certification. Inadequate management of pain places a hospital at risk for closing its accreditation and service to communities. This mandate was created in response to an acknowledged misunderstanding of the necessity to alleviate human suffering. Our concept of treating pain is a rapidly evolving one. It is unjust to apply Florida's present law regarding the acquisition of controlled substances to a person who was using them within the confines of his own home, for his own defined medical condition, which required adequate pain relief. It has been noted in objective accounts of this criminal investigation that no circumstance has been found in which any of the acquired substances were distributed to anyone else. They were for the sole use of Richard Paey for a chronic condition which was inadequately covered by the medical profession. It has also been noted that prosecutors considered the human element in this circumstance at one juncture in time and offered a probation, three-year house arrest option. This option was removed after trial began due to a department policy. It is curious how a policy generated by a limited number of individuals without public input could have the impact of sentencing an individual to life in prison, as opposed to probation in his own home. The legal system is designed to create fairness across a wide range of situations covered by a limited number of laws. In the circumstances of Richard Paey's case, the system has broken down horribly. It is unacceptable for individuals with chronic pain conditions, undertreated by the medical establishment, to be sentenced for drug trafficking, especially under circumstances in which there is zero evidence of any distribution of substances. As a society, we need to own up to the necessity for adequate pain control and the implications it has for the practice of medicine. Drug trafficking is the crime of distribution of illegal substances to others for personal profit. Medical pain management is the application of pharmacy and medical tools to alleviate pain in suffering individuals. The difference between these two is enormous. Why is it so difficult for the criminal system in Florida to figure this out? Christopher J. Martino, D.O., Gulford, N.H. - --- MAP posted-by: Alex