FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Kennedy’s Reefer Madness

by SIA HENRY

Back in November 2012, Colorado and Washington became the first political jurisdictions anywhere in the world to legalize the recreational use of marijuana for adults. These bold statements by the voters of Colorado and Washington have incited unexpected push back, most notably from former Rhode Island Congressman, Patrick Kennedy.

Kennedy seems to fear that the legalization of marijuana will increase the chance that children such as his own, born into families with extensive histories of alcohol and drug addiction, will succumb to drug abuse. He recently formed a group called Smart Approaches to Marijuana (SAM) to fight against ending marijuana prohibition.

Kennedy, who has struggled with drug misuse in the past, joins the vast majority of parents nationwide who want to protect their children from the potential harms of alcohol and other drugs. Still, his support for continued marijuana prohibition is not only impractical and expensive, but counterproductive to adolescent health and well-being.

Decades of government-commissioned and academic studies overwhelmingly affirm that a decrease in marijuana penalties does not lead to an increase in consumption or affect adolescent attitudes toward drug use (NORML). Moreover, a 2007 Columbia University study found that despite decades of severe drug policies, US teens report finding it easier to buy marijuana than beer. This is largely due to the law restricting alcohol sales to those 21 and over. Since Colorado and Washington have incorporated this same age requirement into their bills, legalization should essentially make it harder for young people to obtain marijuana.

Along with incorrectly fearing that legalization will lead to increased juvenile consumption, Kennedy’s anti-marijuana campaign actually harms children more than marijuana control and regulation. While at least 100 million Americans report having used marijuana, the primary victims of harsh marijuana laws continue to be young people.

By virtue of receiving a criminal record for marijuana possession, many juveniles are unnecessarily barred from benefiting from a host of opportunities and support programs. For instance, states can permanently ban individuals with felony drug convictions from receiving Food Stamps or Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). This law affects an estimated 135,000 children.

Moreover, those who supervise federally assisted housing have the authority to deny housing to an entire family when any household member uses controlled substances or is convicted of a drug-related crime.

People with drug convictions are also denied federal financial aid for higher education. Alongside these official sanctions are the unofficial consequences of prohibition such as the negative effect that a criminal record can have on an individual’s employment prospects. These collateral consequences are devastating and can permanently hinder a young person’s personal, educational, and professional success.

Prohibition also makes marijuana use more attractive to many juveniles who actively seek the thrill of rebelling against accepted mainstream conventions. In other words, some young people find marijuana use appealing simply because it is illegal.

Anti-marijuana policies consume a fair portion of law enforcement resources while drawing police officers away from investigating crimes that pose a far greater threat, such as assault, robbery, and murder. A substantial amount of tax-payer dollars are necessary to cover the cost of prosecuting and incarcerating marijuana offenders and funding foster care and social services for the children of those offenders.

Alternatively, marijuana legalization allows state governments to redirect some of these resources to promote proven drug prevention, education, and treatment programs that are significantly cheaper and more effective in reducing drug use. In the eyes of children in families with histories of substance abuse, such vociferous support for drug prohibition likely drips with hypocrisy. Such a “do as I say, not as I do” approach isolates the kids and closes the door to open, honest communication. Such candid discussions provide young people with a safe space to gain autonomy over their own life choices and, more importantly, to seek help if needed.

While I applaud Kennedy’s concerns for his children, keeping marijuana illegal is far more likely to endanger young people – especially those lacking the wealth and connections of a Kennedy.

Sia Henry is a legal intern with the Drug Policy Alliance 

More articles by:
May 30, 2016
Ron Jacobs
The State of the Left: Many Movements, Too Many Goals?
James Abourezk
The Intricacies of Language
Porfirio Quintano
Hillary, Honduras, and the Murder of My Friend Berta
Patrick Cockburn
Airstrikes on ISIS are Reducing Their Cities to Ruins
Uri Avnery
The Center Doesn’t Hold
Raouf Halaby
The Sailors of the USS Liberty: They, Too, Deserve to Be Honored
Rodrigue Tremblay
Barack Obama’s Legacy: What Happened?
Matt Peppe
Just the Facts: The Speech Obama Should Have Given at Hiroshima
Deborah James
Trade Pacts and Deregulation: Latest Leaks Reveal Core Problem with TISA
Michael Donnelly
Still Wavy After All These Years: Flower Geezer Turns 80
Ralph Nader
The Funny Business of Farm Credit
Paul Craig Roberts
Memorial Day and the Glorification of Past Wars
Colin Todhunter
From Albrecht to Monsanto: A System Not Run for the Public Good Can Never Serve the Public Good
Rivera Sun
White Rose Begins Leaflet Campaigns June 1942
Tom H. Hastings
Field Report from the Dick Cheney Hunting Instruction Manual
Weekend Edition
May 27, 2016
Friday - Sunday
John Pilger
Silencing America as It Prepares for War
Rob Urie
By the Numbers: Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are Fringe Candidates
Paul Street
Feel the Hate
Daniel Raventós - Julie Wark
Basic Income Gathers Steam Across Europe
Andrew Levine
Hillary’s Gun Gambit
Jeffrey St. Clair
Hand Jobs: Heidegger, Hitler and Trump
S. Brian Willson
Remembering All the Deaths From All of Our Wars
Dave Lindorff
With Clinton’s Nixonian Email Scandal Deepening, Sanders Must Demand Answers
Pete Dolack
Millions for the Boss, Cuts for You!
Peter Lee
To Hell and Back: Hiroshima and Nagasaki
Gunnar Westberg
Close Calls: We Were Much Closer to Nuclear Annihilation Than We Ever Knew
Karl Grossman
Long Island as a Nuclear Park
Binoy Kampmark
Sweden’s Assange Problem: The District Court Ruling
Robert Fisk
Why the US Dropped Its Demand That Assad Must Go
Martha Rosenberg – Ronnie Cummins
Bayer and Monsanto: a Marriage Made in Hell
Brian Cloughley
Pivoting to War
Stavros Mavroudeas
Blatant Hypocrisy: the Latest Late-Night Bailout of Greece
Arun Gupta
A War of All Against All
Dan Kovalik
NPR, Yemen & the Downplaying of U.S. War Crimes
Randy Blazak
Thugs, Bullies, and Donald J. Trump: The Perils of Wounded Masculinity
Murray Dobbin
Are We Witnessing the Beginning of the End of Globalization?
Daniel Falcone
Urban Injustice: How Ghettos Happen, an Interview with David Hilfiker
Gloria Jimenez
In Honduras, USAID Was in Bed with Berta Cáceres’ Accused Killers
Kent Paterson
The Old Braceros Fight On
Lawrence Reichard
The Seemingly Endless Indignities of Air Travel: Report from the Losing Side of Class Warfare
Peter Berllios
Bernie and Utopia
Stan Cox – Paul Cox
Indonesia’s Unnatural Mud Disaster Turns Ten
Linda Pentz Gunter
Obama in Hiroshima: Time to Say “Sorry” and “Ban the Bomb”
George Souvlis
How the West Came to Rule: an Interview with Alexander Anievas
Julian Vigo
The Government and Your i-Phone: the Latest Threat to Privacy
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail