The Doctoral Dilemma!
Cover your Image, Cover your Wallet, or Cover your Ass?
What comes first?
For twelve
years the Canadian Medical Association has been content to sit on its ass and
show no concern about the risk of signing Medical Marijuana Applications. They
adopted a position of benign disapproval as soon as the MMAR were published. Up
until that point they had been proponents and had made recommendations
regarding the doctoral role and recommended decriminalization. Unfortunately
the Government didn’t swallow the bait and spit it back out. There wasn’t much
they could do!
They could deter most of their membership from
signing by promoting the false belief that there were unknown risks of harm
from long term use. The
liability risks for authorizing its use were unknown. While they did not
disapprove of signing B1’s for Category 1 applications they could not recommend signing B2’s for anything
less because of the possible consequences. Their membership followed
along and created the almost impenetrable barrier of physician refusal to sign.
Three Supreme Court justices just refused to recognize reality threw out
the allegation of any barrier because of lack of evidence. Once upon a time I had the
belief that judges were made judges because in addition to the letter of the
law, they were expected to exercise some common sense. Another myth shot to
hell.
Absolute bullshit: Why
all the sudden opposition?
Because all
of a sudden, if the new MMPR becomes law Doctors become responsible for their
actions: 90% of
CMA
members have in all likelihood never seen a patient who requested their
signature and have never ever read carefully what they were signing on a B2.
They prescribed
nothing, recommended nothing, and were liable for nothing. They simply
fulfilled a useless bureaucratic mandate
Per Form B2
the Physician signing simply certifies the following:
a. The applicant’s symptom(s) listed
in Page 1 of this form falls under Category 2 (symptoms that do not fall under Category
1);
b. conventional treatment(s) for the Category 2
symptom(s) have been tried or considered, and have been found to be ineffective
or medically inappropriate for the treatment of the applicant.
I am aware that a Notice of Compliance has not been
issued under the Food and Drugs Regulations concerning the safety and
effectiveness of marihuana as a drug.
a. If you are a medical specialist that your area
of medical specialization is relevant to the treatment of the applicant’s
medical condition; or
b. if you are not a medical specialist, please declare:
i. that the applicant’s case has been assessed by a specialist;
ii. the specialist’s area of specialization is relevant to the treatment
of the applicant’s medical condition;
iii. that the specialist concurs that conventional treatments for the
symptom are ineffective or medically inappropriate for the treatment of the
applicant; and
iv. the specialist is aware that marihuana is being considered as an
alternative treatment for the applicant.
(Signature required on next page)
Any physician who signed an application for
Medical Marijuana under the MMAR only certified that the instructions on the
form had been followed. They consented to nothing and were not legally
responsible for any risk. The risk is all Health Canada’s, they are the ones who review and approve
the application, license possession and use, and they bear full responsibility
for any future consequences.
The new MMPR makes the signing Doctor actually approve the application
and accept responsibility for any consequences. While the probability of harmful consequences
is extremely remote the CMA
wants an environment similar to that which applies to physicians prescribing
pharmaceuticals, total immunity from prosecution for iatrogenesis (medically induced
harm) when they prescribe drugs they recommend to replace marijuana: the
notorious Sativex
and Marinol. Both
of these have a list of nasty side effects with symptoms that are worse that
those they are supposed to be minimizing. Is somebody pulling strings here?
Big
Pharma?
The CMA has already pointed out to the
Government that it wants immunity
from prosecution for iatrogenic harm before it will even consider the
MMPR proposal.
The CMA has more bugs up its ass when it
comes to another MMPR proposal granting Nurse Practitioners the right to sign
and approve Medical Marijuana Applications.
Horrors: Actually allow Nurses to prescribe on an equal basis with Doctors.
The Medical
Profession would have to abandon its preferred position of respect and
purported infallibility. They would be forced to assume the role of a Master
competing with his former servants for customers and money. In my mind I have a
picture of the CMA board of Directors sitting around their massive conference
table scratching their heads wondering “What eve happened to the century’s old
tradition of nurses grovelling before us like we were God on his rounds?”
Up until
the middle of the last century, the first rule of survival for nurses was constantly stressed throughout their training:
”Never challenge or question a
Doctor’s authority or treatment.”
Termination
was almost inevitable if you did and any excuse was used as grounds for
dismissal. The real unjustified cause was insubordination and lack of
submissiveness to an inflated ego.
Besides
being a big kick in the ego, now comes the real problem for Physicians: Money!
As usual.
Suddenly
they will be faced with competition from rivals not possessed and driven by
greed but by actual compassion and empathy. They can only speculate on the
damage that perception will create but what about the damage to the fee
structure. Somehow I can’t conceive of a nurse making $50 an hour demanding pay
for 5 hours work foe a 15 minute physical and signing of a paper. That would be
unethical.
Nurses
actually understand the Six Pillars of Character that doctors traded for
training in Corporate Finance and Moral Indifference. Patients might actually
value that.
What do you
think?
Later
Blaine Barrett
They are using the word "recommend, since they can't 'prescribe' without a DIN number from FDA approval.
ReplyDeleteAll in all, a good read, though. Agreed.
I thought they eliminated the need for a specialist to sign. So long as they have a medical license, GP or Specialist I thought was acceptable.
But yes, there is NO reason whatsoever for Dr.'s not to sign, because they are only signing to authorize that the patient has a valid medical condition.
And the new proposed MMPR, making Dr's responsible for authorizing them rather than HC, as with the MMAR, is disconcerting, as it will definitely lead to even more Dr's refusing to sign now.
And Matt's Appeal findings are very inappropriate and misguided. I think those judges must be following Harper's lead.
The MMAR is and always has been flawed (read: set up to FAIL) and needed improvement to help the patients gain better access, faster. The new revisions don't address that VALID issue in any way whatsoever, in fact, it will hinder patient access in more ways. The revisions regarding elimination of patient grows, it seems, are only a response to the police concerns about easier enforcement....nothing more. The revision regarding Dr responsibility will PREVENT current card holders from being renewed as well as new applicants.
So, all in all, they've screwed sick and suffering Canadians again. They are playing a terribly cruel game.
It took me three years to educate my family doctor so he would finally accept to sign my MMAR forms.
ReplyDeleteWith the new MMPR, I fear he will not renew my forms next year. And even if he does, I won't be able to afford my meds being forced to buy from a commercial grower at 8.80$/gram more or less.
I currently grow my own specific strains totally organic under natural sunlight outside for 0.05$/gram or less.
Also, we should not overlook the therapeutic benefits of gardening.