The Glade 4.0 :: View topic - 'Internal Possession'

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. -- A Colorado Springs high school student who suffers from seizures that can last 24 hours or more has been barred from returning to class any day he takes marijuana throat lozenges to ease his condition.
Previously the boy was prescribed morphine and other narcotics but doctors found the ingredient in marijuana works better to control his seizures, the Colorado Independent reported Monday.
"They say if he takes his medicine it is 'internal possession' and he cannot come back to school," the teenager's father told the online news blog.

The boy, whose name was not released to protect his identity, missed most of last year after he was diagnosed with diaphragmatic and axial myoclonus, the boy's father told the Independent.

The boy attends Sierra High School in the Harrison School District 2.

The district would not allow the student to possess or consume his prescribed medicine on campus so the boy's family had him transferred to Sierra, where he could walk home to take his medication, as needed, the Independent reported.

That's when the boy found out he would not be allowed to return to class once he consumed a prescribed marijuana lozenge.
A district spokesman said no student may possess or consume medical marijuana on school grounds, per district policy.

and then the "protecting the children" flag goes up and noone will touch it. This is a tired script, played out time and time again. Rarely does an admistrator have the spine to stand up and say "this policy is wrong and we are not going to comply with it" unless they already have done the polling and have the blessing of the district lawyers.

If medical Mj is legal in CO then the policy is discriminatory and needs to be removed.

Hannibal wrote:

Again admins aren't being paid to ignore policy. A principal or superintendent is more like a British PM than an American President. I agree with your angst, but it is misplaced.

The big problem here is that Marinol Lozenges don't get you stoned.

Is the kid being sent back to school after *finishing* the throat lozenge, or while still sucking on it?

I can see the policy's validity if he's still sucking on the lozenge. It can be spit out, and distributed, after all (whether the kid would do it or not is not the concern of policy), which becomes the concern.

Kaffis Mark V wrote:

Doesn't matter. His classmates can just slice him open and shoot up his blood.

Marijuana: the gateway drug to ... MURDER!

I looked up "diaphragmatic and axial myoclonus" on wiki, and apparently myoclonus is not a disease. In fact, it looks to me like the kid has hiccups.

Author:	FarSky [ Mon Feb 07, 2011 11:17 pm ]
Post subject:	'Internal Possession'
/facepalm http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/26 ... etail.html Quote: COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. -- A Colorado Springs high school student who suffers from seizures that can last 24 hours or more has been barred from returning to class any day he takes marijuana throat lozenges to ease his condition. Previously the boy was prescribed morphine and other narcotics but doctors found the ingredient in marijuana works better to control his seizures, the Colorado Independent reported Monday. "They say if he takes his medicine it is 'internal possession' and he cannot come back to school," the teenager's father told the online news blog. The boy, whose name was not released to protect his identity, missed most of last year after he was diagnosed with diaphragmatic and axial myoclonus, the boy's father told the Independent. The boy attends Sierra High School in the Harrison School District 2. The district would not allow the student to possess or consume his prescribed medicine on campus so the boy's family had him transferred to Sierra, where he could walk home to take his medication, as needed, the Independent reported. That's when the boy found out he would not be allowed to return to class once he consumed a prescribed marijuana lozenge. A district spokesman said no student may possess or consume medical marijuana on school grounds, per district policy.

Author:	Rorinthas [ Mon Feb 07, 2011 11:21 pm ]
Post subject:
Are MJ lozenges legal in CO?

Author:	Hannibal [ Mon Feb 07, 2011 11:29 pm ]
Post subject:
If it's legal for the kid to be given by a doctor, and the school isn't considered private property, then why aren't the school administrators being tarred and feathered by folks as I type this? I'd suspect that this has to do with some "zero tolerance" rule in place.

Author:	Rorinthas [ Mon Feb 07, 2011 11:41 pm ]
Post subject:	'Internal Possession'
The principal is just enforcing district policy. That's his/her job. If medical Mj is legal in CO then the policy is discriminatory and needs to be removed. One should bring this to the attention of the state board with the forewaring that the next call will be from their lawyer.

Author:	Hannibal [ Mon Feb 07, 2011 11:52 pm ]
Post subject:
and then the "protecting the children" flag goes up and noone will touch it. This is a tired script, played out time and time again. Rarely does an admistrator have the spine to stand up and say "this policy is wrong and we are not going to comply with it" unless they already have done the polling and have the blessing of the district lawyers.

The Glade 4.0 https://gladerebooted.net/

'Internal Possession' https://gladerebooted.net/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=5437	Page 1 of 2

Author:	Lex Luthor [ Mon Feb 07, 2011 11:54 pm ]
Post subject:	Re:
Hannibal wrote: and then the "protecting the children" flag goes up and noone will touch it. This is a tired script, played out time and time again. Rarely does an admistrator have the spine to stand up and say "this policy is wrong and we are not going to comply with it" unless they already have done the polling and have the blessing of the district lawyers. I'm sure that 95% of the time administrators sort out these things fine, but that doesn't make news.

Author:	Lenas [ Mon Feb 07, 2011 11:58 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: 'Internal Possession'
Rorinthas wrote: If medical Mj is legal in CO then the policy is discriminatory and needs to be removed. I believe it has been legal since 2000.

Author:	Rorinthas [ Mon Feb 07, 2011 11:59 pm ]
Post subject:	'Internal Possession'
Hannibal wrote: and then the "protecting the children" flag goes up and noone will touch it. This is a tired script, played out time and time again. Rarely does an admistrator have the spine to stand up and say "this policy is wrong and we are not going to comply with it" unless they already have done the polling and have the blessing of the district lawyers. Again admins aren't being paid to ignore policy. A principal or superintendent is more like a British PM than an American President. I agree with your angst, but it is misplaced.

Author:	Arathain Kelvar [ Tue Feb 08, 2011 12:33 am ]
Post subject:	Re: 'Internal Possession'
Rorinthas wrote: Hannibal wrote: and then the "protecting the children" flag goes up and noone will touch it. This is a tired script, played out time and time again. Rarely does an admistrator have the spine to stand up and say "this policy is wrong and we are not going to comply with it" unless they already have done the polling and have the blessing of the district lawyers. Again admins aren't being paid to ignore policy. A principal or superintendent is more like a British PM than an American President. I agree with your angst, but it is misplaced. It's not. I am frequently at odds with my employer. He keeps me around because I am more valuable than I am an annoyance. Principals are not paid to be drones, they can make decisions on their own. They can be pressured or fired, but it is obvious, in this case, what is right, and he shouldn't be such a pussy.

Author:	Xequecal [ Tue Feb 08, 2011 3:16 am ]
Post subject:	Re: 'Internal Possession'
By publicly challenging the policy, he has nothing to gain but 15 minutes of fame and everything to lose. He could lose his job or even be sued. Even if he "wins" and gets the policy reversed, he's still running high odds of being treated with contempt by the higher ups and being sidelined at the first opportunity/excuse in favor of someone who will "stay in line." Even worse, after being fired or forced to quit he'll have a very hard time finding another job because noone wants to hire an employee that doesn't follow orders. It's the same reason whistleblowers in politics/law/finance are so rare. It's the "right" thing to do, but it still ruins you. You'll lose your job right quick and be blacklisted forever, better hope you got a lot of handouts in your 15 minutes.

Author:	Jasmy [ Tue Feb 08, 2011 3:31 am ]
Post subject:	Re: 'Internal Possession'
Apparently my first post was eaten, so I say again... What. The. **?? I can't dose my son with his prescribed meds before school or from home at lunchtime?? Are you kidding me?? Someone needs his/her * handed to them, pronto!!

Author:	Diamondeye [ Tue Feb 08, 2011 9:05 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: 'Internal Possession'
I doubt very much that "adhering to policy" or "deviating from policy" can really be said to be the issue here, because I think we can all safely assume that MJ throat lozenges were not on anyone's mind when they wrote the policy, nor are they mentioned anywhere in it. In fact, I've never even heard of them before. This is an interpretation of policy, by the principal or whoever made this decision.

Author:	Rorinthas [ Tue Feb 08, 2011 9:41 pm ]
Post subject:
Touche' DE

Author:	Lenas [ Tue Feb 08, 2011 9:45 pm ]
Post subject:
The policy probably doesn't even go into that much depth. I'd be surprised if it's anything more comprehensive than a "zero tolerance on all drugs" policy.

Author:	Lydiaa [ Tue Feb 08, 2011 11:43 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: 'Internal Possession'
I guess the implications of taking restricted substances (even under medical advice) in school is what's causing this little lapse in logic. The school is simply afraid of some other parents sueing cause he ate a kid due to getting the munchies from his medication. The school would have to then take full responsibility because the MJ kid could simply say he was under the influence of drugs... Most of the time prescription drugs only have bad side effects for the person taking it. In the case of drugs of addiction, they tend to have behavior side effects as well.

Author:	Lenas [ Wed Feb 09, 2011 12:31 pm ]
Post subject:
Common occurrence in people is usually hiccups, but severe cases can "distort movement and severely limit a person's ability to sleep, eat, talk, and walk."

Page 1 of 2	All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	Kaffis Mark V [ Wed Feb 09, 2011 12:03 am ]
Post subject:
Hmm. I need more info, here. Throat lozenge. We're talking prescription cough drops containing compounds commonly used as a recreational narcotic. Is the kid being sent back to school after finishing the throat lozenge, or while still sucking on it? I can see the policy's validity if he's still sucking on the lozenge. It can be spit out, and distributed, after all (whether the kid would do it or not is not the concern of policy), which becomes the concern. That's the only way this story makes any sense at all.

Author:	Lenas [ Wed Feb 09, 2011 12:44 am ]
Post subject:
It said he walked home to take his meds, so I have to (I think reasonably) assume that he would finish a cough drop before walking back to school. This is also assuming that he doesn't walk in the door, eat the cough drop, and walk right back. I'm sure he would hang out for a bit... Kids do that.

Author:	Taskiss [ Wed Feb 09, 2011 6:38 am ]
Post subject:	Re: 'Internal Possession'
I looked up "diaphragmatic and axial myoclonus" on wiki, and apparently myoclonus is not a disease. In fact, it looks to me like the kid has hiccups.

Author:	Khross [ Wed Feb 09, 2011 12:57 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: 'Internal Possession'
The big problem here is that Marinol Lozenges don't get you stoned.

Author:	Talya [ Wed Feb 09, 2011 2:36 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: 'Internal Possession'
Khross wrote: The big problem here is that Marinol Lozenges don't get you stoned. yeah, i can see how that would suck. Wait...that's not what you meant.

Author:	Stathol [ Wed Feb 09, 2011 5:00 pm ]
Post subject:	Re:
Kaffis Mark V wrote: Is the kid being sent back to school after finishing the throat lozenge, or while still sucking on it? I can see the policy's validity if he's still sucking on the lozenge. It can be spit out, and distributed, after all (whether the kid would do it or not is not the concern of policy), which becomes the concern. Doesn't matter. His classmates can just slice him open and shoot up his blood. Marijuana: the gateway drug to ... MURDER!

Author:	Kaffis Mark V [ Wed Feb 09, 2011 6:43 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Re:
Stathol wrote: Kaffis Mark V wrote: Is the kid being sent back to school after finishing the throat lozenge, or while still sucking on it? I can see the policy's validity if he's still sucking on the lozenge. It can be spit out, and distributed, after all (whether the kid would do it or not is not the concern of policy), which becomes the concern. Doesn't matter. His classmates can just slice him open and shoot up his blood. Marijuana: the gateway drug to ... MURDER! Wow. I guess I lucked out because my classmates never thought to do that to get at my dexedrine- and adderall-laced blood.

Author:	darksiege [ Wed Feb 09, 2011 7:21 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Re:
Stathol wrote: Doesn't matter. His classmates can just slice him open and shoot up his blood. Marijuana: the gateway drug to ... MURDER! How else are they supposed to get the guys skull to make a bong out of it?

Author:	Müs [ Wed Feb 09, 2011 7:56 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: 'Internal Possession'
Taskiss wrote: I looked up "diaphragmatic and axial myoclonus" on wiki, and apparently myoclonus is not a disease. In fact, it looks to me like the kid has hiccups. Hiccups once in a while, for 5 mins isn't terrible. Hiccups constantly, every day, for hours and hours on end... would suck major amounts of ***.