 | Cannabis Inquiry '98: Third Select Committee Hearing |
12 August 1998
The NZ parliamentary health select committee held its third hearing on cannabis and mental health today. Testifying were representatives of the
Schizophrenia Fellowship (SF), a support and advocacy group for people with schizophrenia and their families, and the senior clinician and youth
counselor of the Wellington Alcohol and Drug Service (WADS).
The basic messages of the SF were:
- that cannabis use aggravated schizophrenia and impeded recovery, often because people would stop taking their prescribed medications and use cannabis instead, and
- inadequate attention and funding were directed toward people with dual diagnosis, i.e.,
psychiatric disorder (particular schizophrenia) and also suffering from harmful alcohol (usually) or other drug use.
The WADS highlighted the increasing incidence of cannabis dependence among the people referred to them, this having increased over the past couple of years so as to constitute about 25 percent of total referrals. Figures provided showed 120 referrals out of 518 (23 percent) from 1 June 1996 to 30 April 1997 and 133 referrals out of 682 (20 percent) from1 May 1997 to 30 April 1998 were deemed to be "clients with cannabis as main drug of abuse". Senior clinician Geoffrey Robinson and youth counselot Shane Murdoch repeatedly said that ten percent of cannabis users meet criteria of dependence (although no evidence was presented to support this statistic),
which they said was about the same as alcohol over a lifetime. Unfortunately, no reference was made to the differences in physiological and sociological harmfulness associated with these respective dependencies.
Amazingly, committee members (MPs from all parties) were completely tuned in to the issues raised (and the problems with) this testimony, and often seemed to be educating the people giving testimony about the evidence. The first question asked of the SF people after they finished reading their testimony was from the chair (National party MP Brian Neeson, previously an avowed prohibitionist but now clearly seeing the light). Mr Neeson asked if the SF had done a review of the literature and if they were aware what the "scientific evidence" said about the situation! Questions of this kind were frequent and absolutely the rule: "couldn't cannabis use be an effect of the problem, rather than the cause?", "wouldn't alcohol use be just as bad or worse?", "doesn't prohibition make it more difficult for these people to get help?", etc.
Mr Murdoch said two or three times that young people do not perceive cannabis is harming them and that they prefer it to alcohol because unlike alcohol cannabis does not cause people to vomit, pass out, get into fights, and generally get into trouble. Cannabis had a calming influence, which also accounted, the SF submission said, for why some people with schizophrenia find cannabis helpful, even if only for a short term. The theme of cannabis as having a calming, therapeutic, anti-violence effect was repeated several times by both committee members and witnesses during the proceedings, and now appears to be taken as an article of faith.
Committee members continually raised the issue of the effect of prohibition on driving cannabis use underground, making it more difficult to have a rational discussion about cannabis use, impeding health and education efforts, etc. Those testifying largely agreed with these comments. Mr Murdoch said several times that kids find cannabis much more easy to obtain than alcohol, "because with cannabis you have open slather with no controls" whereas with alcohol "you have shopkeepers who are careful about who they sell to ". In response to a question about what policy would be best from a mental health standpoint, Mr Murdoch said he believed cannabis should be regulated like alcohol and the government should "tax the hell out of it".
This reference to cannabis regulation/taxation was gratifying (as were the nods and 'mm-hms' of the committee members) because alcohol-style regulation was the policy recommended by the Drug Policy Forum Trust in its final report earlier this year.
At one point in response to a question Dr Robinson referred to the ubiquity of cannabis use and said flatly "Prohibition has failed". Newly elected National MP Shane Ardern immediately echoed this statement: "Prohibition has failed", then for good measure added "Prohibition is a nonsense" (exact quote). To my knowledge this is Mr Ardern's first public statement regarding cannabis policy (he is a first time MP, narrowly elected in a recent by-election in Taranaki). Another committee member, ACT party MP Ken Shirley, is already on record as saying cannabis prohibition is a "nonsense", although Mr Shirley did not actively enter into the legal debate today.
Another interesting moment occurred when Jill Pettis (Labour) asked the WADS contingent whether they agreed that the reason "there is still still so much misinformation about cannabis out there is that there are a number of people making a very good living by scaring people about cannabis and demonising it. I mean you have auditoriums filled with frightened parents and somebody up there talking about left brain and right brain and drawing circles on the whiteboard and the kids know it's not true because they puff a bit on Saturday night and they don't go psychotic. Don't you think they say these things because it's in their financial self-interest?" (This is from memory, but pretty close.) This was a clear reference to Trevor Grice of Life Education, whose school auditorium-based scaremongering of students and parents about the evils of cannabis is legendary--and whose book (with cartoonist Tom Scott) "The Great Brain Robbery" raised one-sided
anti-cannabis propaganda to new (post 1930's) heights. Ms Pettis' surprisingly frank and pointed question brought a hearty laugh from the committee members and the public and press galleries, in part out of sympathy for Dr Robinson being put so firmly on the spot. He nicely dodged the question, however, saying only that it was important to tell the truth in drug education programmes, that we were now largely telling the truth about alcohol and tobacco, but telling the truth about cannabis had lagged far behind.
One final example of what was an absolutely amazing session. At one point Dr Robinson spoke about the need for education on cannabis, which he said should be directed at young people. He added, in jest, "it probably wouldn't be much use for old people", at which point at least three
committee members simultaneously said, laughing, "It might do them some good", "Could help their arthritis", and the like. This brought a good laugh from all assembled.
To his immense credit, Chairman Neeson is allowing a wide-ranging discussion into the legal situation regarding cannabis. He certainly shows no signs of having been asked by senior National party officials to rein in his investigation, which at this point looks likely to produce a report much at odds with the prevailing government prohibitionist line.
The committee will be in Dunedin next week, then back to Wellington, followed by trips to Auckland and Christchurch and then probably back to Wellington. They plan to conclude hearings next month, with a report likely to be tabled in Parliament late this year.
The select committee members appear to have seen the light on cannabis and cannabis policy. These hearings continue to look like they could shape up to be an important event in the winding down of the international war on drugs. Stay tuned.
Schizophrenia Fellowship says Dope use can lead to Schizophrenia
Radio New Zealand News, 12/8/98
Representatives of the Schizophrenia Fellowship have told a parliamentary select committee that cannabis use by the mentally ill leads to alienation, crime and suicide.
The committee is looking into the mental health effects of cannabis use.
Jenny Robertson, from the Fellowship, says at least half of psychiatric patients suffer from drug related problems.
A spokesman for Capital Coast Health in Wellington told the committee that a quarter of its psychiatric patients in the last two years were addicted to cannabis.
|
|
|
|
| |
| Login |
|
You can register for some special extra features. | |
| Article Rating |
Average Score: 4.8
Votes: 5
| |
|
