After Ballot Result, MMS Adopts New Policy on Medical Marijuana

WALTHAM — Physicians of the Mass. Medical Society (MMS) have approved an extensive new resolution on medical marijuana, outlining considerations and criteria for regulations governing the implementation of the law, following voter approval of the ballot initiative in November that allows the use of medical marijuana in the state.

The resolution, which now becomes official policy of the society, was adopted unanimously by the MMS House of Delegates, its policy-making body, at the organization’s 2012 Interim Meeting on Dec. 1.

The new policy covers such issues as the nature of the physician-patient relationship under the law, patient certification under the law, implications on occupational health and safety, the relationship of medical marijuana to the state’s Prescription Monitoring Program, and physician peer-reporting requirements under regulations of the Board of Registration in Medicine, which licenses physicians to practice.

“We recognize that the law is binding as a result of the vote,” said MMS President Dr. Richard Aghababian, “but as written, the law poses many unanswered questions. Of particular are issues that bear directly on a physician’s practice of medicine under the regulations of the Mass. Board of Registration in Medicine and those that could affect the physician-patient relationship.

“As the law requires physician participation to certify patients, it is imperative that we provide perspective and input on these issues as regulations are developed to govern the full implementation of the medical marijuana law,” he continued.

Specifically, the new policy targets seven areas with respect to the new law and states that the MMS will:

• Work with the Mass. Board of Registration in Medicine to define the nature of the physician-patient relationship required under the law, including required parent or guardian permission for those under 18 years of age;

• Advocate for the development of appropriate standards for certification by physicians, including that physicians must have an active license from the Mass. Board of Registration in Medicine, a Mass. Department of Public Health Control Substance Registration, and a Federal Drug Enforcement Agency Registration, elements not specified in the law;

• Advocate that the certifications for registration cards be based on a patient’s diagnosis and the physician’s assessment that the patient’s pain or symptoms cannot be controlled with conventional medical therapy;

• Advocate that the regulations consider the implications of marijuana use on occupational health and safety;

• Advocate to the Mass. Board of Registration in Medicine and the Mass. Department of Public Health that regulations include a number of recommendations from the American Society on Addiction Medicine relevant to patient care;

• advocate with the Mass. Department of Public Health and the Legislature that marijuana dispensing be integrated with and become part of the state’s Prescription Monitoring Program; and

• work with the Mass. Board of Registration in Medicine to clarify the mandated peer-reporting requirements that do not apply to physicians who choose to provide certifications under the law.

The MMS had opposed the ballot initiative and the legalization of medicinal marijuana until such time that scientific studies demonstrate its safety and efficacy, and it has asked the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration to reclassify marijuana so that its potential medicinal use by humans may be further studied and potentially regulated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.