Log In Register

Thousands Of CO Marijuana Applications On Hold

  • Thread starter Thread starter GeneralRipper
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

Thousands Of CO Marijuana Applications On Hold

GeneralRipper 10 Replies 1,759 Views
Page 1 of 1 · Replies 1–11 of 11
1
G

GeneralRipper

Posts
93
Reactions
9
Joined
May 1, 2011
Points
18
Good news, bad news

Good news from the state board of health's meeting last week: Effective Jan. 1, the medical marijuana patient registry fee is dropping from $90 to $35.

On the other hand, word also came from Ron Hyman, director of the registry, that some 3,200 patient applications are on hold.

This came as a surprise to most people, but not to Gina, a Colorado Springs resident who asked to have her last name withheld, due to privacy concerns. "I mailed my renewal Sept 22, and have proof of reciept [sic]," she e-mailed the registry on Oct. 30, copying the Indy. "My friend mailed his the same day, and received his red card dated Oct 17. I have yet to receive my card."

Gina's recommending physician was local doctor Frank J. Wright. And while she still hasn't received her red card, she's definitely not alone, as Wright says roughly 1,600 of the signatures in question originated with his office.

What the issue is, exactly, is unclear. Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment spokesman Mark Salley would only confirm that the applications are being re-reviewed due a problem with the recommending signatures. And Wright says it's because he used his physician assistants and nurse practitioners to also perform examinations.

"Now, we've been doing this — when I say 'we,' I mean all the physicians who have been doing this with medical marijuana — have been designating PAs and NPs for years, it's nothing new," he says. "But [the state] made a ruling, but didn't tell any of us. I mean, they were holding these things up for months, and we didn't know about it."

Wright's logic revolves around Rule 400 of the Colorado Medical Practice Act, which states doctors "may delegate to a physician assistant licensed by the Board the authority to perform acts that constitute the practice of medicine." He thinks he'll likely end up in court defending this interpretation. In the meantime, patients' only recourse is to wait out a review; no word on how long.
 
it is 4,200 at least. These patients must request a hearing when/if they are denied. We need them to bring this shit down.
 
just another way to ignore the will of the people as expressed in the Colorado constitution and attempt to legislate their version of 'morality'- that is, "do what I want and not what I don't, because that's MY idea of freedom and your ideas aren't worth shit!"
 
They are hitting things at all angles huh? wtf. I also bet they ain't liking increased plant counts. How many MD's are going to write scripts (esp. for more plants) if they are at risk for going to court ? Not many.
 
WTF!!! Think of the Cancer and Hiv/aids Patients who are extremely sick and don't know a connect!!
 
This pile is getting worked through, and people are starting to get their cards.

The way I see it, is the patient is the one gambling, when they get their rec from a doctor they found on craigslist offering $60 walk-ins up to 10PM...
 
They took my money a month ago and still no card... not that it matters.

Check says for Renewal and i have the cleared check..
The certified mail receipt and the application
 
They took my money a month ago and still no card... not that it matters.

Check says for Renewal and i have the cleared check..

You have this guy to thank:
http://img215.invalid.com/img215/6094/drurbinasmall.jpg
 
Yeah i knew some shit was up... but i say bring it. more medical records than i can fit into a manila envelop.. 2 years is the size of a New York City phone book.. and my shit goes back more than 15 years.


Sucks i didnt use Dr Write or his PA....

So everyone Blame Dr. Chris Urbina. Lets hope that he DIAF or at least something horribly violent.


When asked this question, Dr. Urbina insisted that he was following the letter of the law, even though no document we've been able to find explains the distinction between "denied" and "rejected" the CDPHE is using.

For attorney Corry, however, other issues related to the department's policy are equally important. He represents one of the doctors targeted -- Dr. Frank Wright, who received a letter from the department questioning applications and his approach to offering recommendations. In a reply to the CDPHE, Corry takes issue with the department's interpretation. The entire document is on view below, but here's an excerpt pertaining to the double signatures:

Your letter claims the Physician Certification should "be signed by the examining DO or MD, and no one else." (Emphasis added.) There is no requirement in any Constitutional provision, statute, regulation, or policy prohibiting or invalidating a particular form if the physician's advice is bolstered by another professional. If the CDPHE is in fact "charged with maintaining the integrity of the medical marijuana application process," as your letter alleges, then bolstering the M.D.'s advice with that of another licensed professional only furthers that goal, and provides additional protections against incorrect diagnoses or human error. Medical diagnosis is a subjective art as much as a science. There is nothing wrong with a patient receiving a second opinion.
Moreover, Corry argues that state law and the Colorado constitution establish that a doctor's recommendation is as valid as a registration card when it comes to legally acquiring medical marijuana -- and the time it took for the department to act means its attempt to either deny or reject the applications is now null and void. His response addresses this assertion like so:

On information and belief based on communications with numerous patients, none of these applications have been denied by the Registry, so the application "shall be accorded the same legal effect as a registry identification card." Article XVIII § 14(3)(d). Thus all of these applications are now automatically approved by operation of law, without the need of any further action by the Registry. At this point, any denial on the Registry's part would be untimely and without legal effect, given the mandatory requirement that "[w]ithin thirty days of receiving the information referred to in subparagraphs (3) (b) (I)-(IV), the state health agency shall verify medical information contained in the patient's written documentation." Colorado Constitution, Article XVIII § 14(3)(c) (emphasis added).
When asked to summarize his take, Corry says, "The CDPHE has 35 days to deny an application. If it does not deny an application within 35 days, that application is automatically approved under law, and it's too late for the CDPHE to deny it. So I don't think they can deny a single application.

"The application is a registry card -- it's the functional equivalent of one, and the law treats it identically to a registry card. If the CDPHE decides not to issue a registry card, it doesn't matter, because what the patient holds in his hand is the same thing as a registry card. That's why I've advised Dr. Wright to continue practicing medicine full time, since he's under no restrictions."

I do have a PA that fills my Oxymorphone script every month...
 
I mailed mine off a month ago and my check was cashed yesterday FWIW
 
Page 1 of 1 · Replies 1–11 of 11
1
Back
Top Bottom