Proposal 1 on Nov. 4 ballot would allow use and cultivation of Marijuana for specified medical conditions.
‘On marijuana use, there are some areas in medicine like glaucoma and chemo therapy, where marijuana is actually a very, very good medication,? said Dr. James O’Neill, Clarkston Medical Group.
However, O’Neill worries the law, as written, is too vague, which is why he probably will vote against it.
‘If it ends up that you have these Amsterdam type coffee shops where they sell cannabis, mushrooms and a whole bunch of other things, I think it’s going to be a disaster,? said O’Neill. ‘It would probably be better to be regulated like we do all other class two and controlled substances and do it through the FDA.?
He believes the reason many people end up using illegal substances for depression and anxiety is due to the fact that there isn’t a mandate making sure people get the proper psychological care and prescribed medicines that they need.
‘I think we need to not only look at the illegal drugs that people take, but provide better mental health and make sure people are taking the drugs that we prescribe,? he said.
Joe Wauldron, president of Clarkston Area Youth Assistance, said when he first looked at the proposal he thought it was OK because the use of the drug would be regulated by a doctor, but he became concerned when he read the proposal would ‘permit registered individuals to grow limited amounts of marijuana for qualifying patients in an enclosed locked facility.?
‘I think what will happen eventually is a person will start growing it in their basement and start selling it on their own, and then you have a drug problem,? he said. ‘Where would it be grown at and who would control the growing? That’s the problem I have.?
Proposal 2 would amend the state constitution to permit human embryo and human embryonic stem cell research in Michigan.
‘If you look at the embryo, its living tissue, it’s a human being and if you look at the people who have stored these, it’s very expensive to store them and to maintain them,? said O’Neill. ‘After they have used all the embryos they’re going to use, they’re going to destroy them.?
Going to a Catholic College and medical school as well as being a practicing Roman Catholic all of his life, O’Neill says ‘I am as pro-life as you can get.?
However, if embryos were being ‘specifically donated? to become stem cells, they would become living cells in human beings and not destroyed. But he said he will not vote in favor of the current proposal, pending more discussion on the issue by doctors, theologians, and law makers.
‘I do think we haven’t given enough thought to this before it was written to understand the actual use of stem cells and the abuse of them,? he said.
Holly Baugh, a Waterford resident said she will vote against it, based on her and her husband’s personal experience.
‘Not all of them are being destroyed,? Baugh said. ‘We actually have two children from some of these couples. We know they’re still viable and they can still produce life.?