« Lessons from State Court (Personal) | Main | Are Election Politics (finally) Catching Up with the Drug War? (Personal) »
April 17, 2008
Intelligent Opposition Requires Accurate Knowledge (Personal)
It's axiomatic in Medicine that if one’s diagnosis is wrong, one’s treatment is unlikely to be successful. Proposition 215 provided the first-ever chance for unbiased clinical studies of the impact of the drug war on admitted drug users; however “reform” (in company with most other elements of society) has been so slow to grasp the implications of that statement as to suggest denial may be so basic and prevalent a human behavioral characteristic as to have its own serious implications.
In any event, in the twelfth year since 215 passed, reform is still without a coherent strategy for obtaining the rights won by the initiative for the policy victims reform claims to represent. On a larger scale, we humans are also still in massive denial about climate change, and "overpopulation" is a word not used very often.
Closer to home: the opportunistic guerrilla war being waged against patients by California law enforcement; there’s still no mechanism for tabulating, tracking, and assisting at the trials being generated by (usually outrageous) patient arrests.
I’ve now been a witness in such trials at both state and federal levels and the difference was profound. In federal court, a judge backing the policy easily prevented the jury from hearing relevant medical testimony. In state court, the rules would permit knowledgeable defense lawyers and physician experts to educate both judge and jury. The catch is that the relevant information has to be effectively presented. Before that can happen, it has to be known, understood, and believed.
Doctor Tom
Posted by tjeffo at April 17, 2008 07:17 PM