Pubdate: Thu, 26 Dec 2013
Source: Detroit News (MI)
Copyright: 2013 The Detroit News
Contact:  http://www.detroitnews.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/126
Author: Margaret Farenger

CHALLENGING THE RHETORIC OF DRUG POLICY

Last week, delegates of the American Medical Association voted to
affirm the AMA's position that "cannabis is a dangerous drug and as
such is a public health concern." The body turned down proposals to
endorse legalizing marijuana.

It's a high-profile decision that deserves the attention of parents,
policymakers and the community. It's time that we step back, take a
harder look at existing health data, and talk about the options we
have to reduce drug use and make people the priority.

Generally, the public only hears choices surrounding drug policy
presented in the extreme: We can accept complete drug legalization or
mass incarceration. Why has it been so difficult to have a fact-based
discussion of other options?

Loaded language is part of the problem. Words like "prohibition," "war
on drugs" and "reefer madness" are inflammatory and too vague to add
to generate solutions.

Similarly, use of the words "legalization" and "decriminalization"
interchangeably serves to distort communication. Recently, I was
approached after a community meeting by a sharp-thinking Ferndale
resident who wanted to know why the city's new marijuana ordinance,
which stated that it protects the "transfer" of the drug, was
described as decriminalization. Good question. If transferring the
drug is legal, this is legalization.

Decriminalization only removes criminal penalties from the user,
sometimes in favor of treatment or other remedies, while drug
manufacture and sales are still criminal.

According to the of the AMA's Council on Science and Public Health
council, "Somewhat lost in the debate about legalization of cannabis
are the recognized harms. Cannabis continues to be the most commonly
used illicit drug in the U.S. with patterns of use trending upwards,
particularly among youth."

A growing body of evidence, accessible through the National Institutes
of Health, confirms marijuana's effects on learning, memory and IQ.
Adolescent use and daily use appear to carry the highest level of
risk. When use begins during adolescence, the percentage of those
addicted rises to 17 percent, or fully 1 in 6 users.

Reform of drug policy must continue and should seek to balance public
health and safety. Health care reform has the potential to expand
access to treatment and increase early screening for substance use
disorders. Drug courts and mental health courts, both gaining support
in southeast Michigan, are part of a multifaceted approach to policy
reform.

This should come as further encouragement for community members who
volunteer their time with prevention coalitions and recovery and
family advocacy groups. Their voices are crucial to achieving just and
effective reforms.

Legalization would mean the formation of a commercial marijuana
industry operating in our communities. The danger in this development
requires honest and careful consideration. Would Big Marijuana hold
itself to a higher standard than Big Tobacco when it comes to
advertising aimed at minors?

For this reason and others, legalization is not the best option for
reform when risks versus benefits are analyzed.

We need a nuanced discussion informed by health data, and it must
involve members of the community who have so much at stake.
Challenging the rhetoric of two choices is the next step forward.

Photo: Pot is still not as safe as some would argue. (Ben Margot)

*

About the Author: Margaret Farenger is a public health advocate and 
consultant working in southeast Michigan.

*End*
- ---
MAP posted-by: Matt