The NJ Medicinal Marijuana Review Panel has recommended additional conditions for inclusion in the state’s Medicinal Marijuana Program
The New Jersey Medicinal Marijuana Review Panel (MMRP) has recently recommended that the New Jersey Department of Health (NJDOH) qualify numerous additional conditions for inclusion in the state’s Medicinal Marijuana Program.
To participate in the program, a patient must suffer from an approved debilitating medical condition. The current list of qualifying conditions for medical marijuana includes, among others, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (Lou Gehrig’s disease), Multiple Sclerosis, terminal cancer, muscular dystrophy, inflammatory bowel disease, certain terminal illnesses, and post-traumatic stress disorder.
On July 21, the MMRP recommended that the Commissioner qualify dozens of additional debilitating conditions falling within the categories of chronic pain, migraine, anxiety, and Tourette’s Syndrome for inclusion in the State’s medicinal marijuana program. Among others, these specific conditions include spinal stenosis, neuropathic pain, arthritis, opioid use disorder, and fibromyalgia/osteoarthritis. The MMRP recommended against the inclusion of conditions related to the categories of asthma and chronic fatigue.
In making its recommendations, the MMRP reviewed 45 petitions and the following factors:
The extent to which the condition is generally accepted by the medical community and other experts as a valid, existing medical condition;
If one or more treatments of the condition, rather than the condition itself, are alleged to be the cause of the patient’s suffering, the extent to which the treatments causing suffering are generally accepted by the medical community and other experts as valid treatments for the condition;
The extent to which the condition itself and/or the treatments thereof cause severe suffering such as severe and/or chronic pain, severe nausea and/or vomiting, or otherwise severely impair the patient’s ability to carry on activities of daily living;
The availability of conventional medical therapies other than those that cause suffering to alleviate suffering caused by the condition and/or the treatment thereof;
The extent to which evidence that is generally accepted among the medical community and other experts supports a finding that the use of marijuana alleviates suffering caused by the condition and/or the treatment thereof; and
Letters of support from physicians or other licensed health care professionals knowledgeable about the condition.
The Department of Health will accept public comments regarding the MMRP’s recommendations until Monday, September 25, 2017. Comments must be emailed or postmarked by that date and can be delivered electronically at mmp.administrator@doh.nj.gov or by mail to NJ Department of Health, Medicinal Marijuana Program, PO Box 360, Trenton, NJ 08625-0360, Attn: Medicinal Marijuana Review Panel.
This article is a part of a series pertaining to cannabis legalization in New Jersey and the United States at large. Prior articles in this series are below:
If you have any questions or if you would like to discuss the matter further, please contact me, Dan McKillop, at 201-806-3364.
Disclaimer: Possession, use, distribution, and/or sale of cannabis is a Federal crime and is subject to related Federal policy. Legal advice provided by Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC is designed to counsel clients regarding the validity, scope, meaning, and application of existing and/or proposed cannabis law. Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC will not provide assistance in circumventing Federal or state cannabis law or policy, and advice provided by our office should not be construed as such.
What Business Owners Get Wrong Before Meeting a Litigation Attorney
What should you expect when meeting a litigation attorney about a business dispute? You should expect to describe the dispute in your own words, hand over the most important documents, flag any deadlines or immediate threats, and leave with a clearer picture of the problem, what information is still needed, and the likely next steps. […]
Arbitration vs. Litigation vs. Mediation: What New Jersey Businesses Should Know Before Signing a Contract
Arbitration resolves disputes privately before an arbitrator whose decision is usually final, while litigation resolves them in court with full rights of appeal. Whether a business ends up in arbitration or litigation is often decided when it signs the contract, long before any dispute arises. Key Takeaways When facing a contract dispute, carefully consider your […]
Can You Own Part of a New Jersey Business Without a Written Agreement?
Can you own part of a business in New Jersey without a written agreement? Yes, it is possible. Under New Jersey’s Uniform Partnership Act, a partnership can arise when two or more people carry on a business as co-owners for profit, whether or not they ever intended to form one. Ownership doesn’t necessarily depend on […]
Crisis-Proofing Your New Jersey Business: Building a Crisis Response Plan Before You Need One
For New Jersey businesses, crisis preparedness should be viewed as a legal and operational function, not simply an emergency-management exercise. A well-designed crisis response plan can help preserve evidence, protect confidential communications, meet reporting obligations, limit unnecessary exposure, and prevent an already difficult situation from becoming a larger legal problem. Key Takeaways A serious crisis […]
Monmouth County's Next Development Wave: What Developers and Investors Need to Know
Monmouth County is entering a significant new phase of development. For those looking to acquire property or undertake a new project, understanding the market opportunity is only the beginning. The more important question is whether a particular property can actually be developed as contemplated and what approvals, agreements, and other conditions will be required to […]
Are Your Conversations with AI Shielded from Discovery? Courts Are Split
Whether a client’s prompts to a generative AI tool and the documents it produces are protected from disclosure depends on the case type, who claims protection, and whether counsel was involved. In United States v. Heppner, a New York federal judge ruled that a criminal defendant’s communications with an AI platform were protected by neither […]
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Sign up to get the latest from our attorneys!
Explore What Matters Most to You.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!
