WA State Card Renew

Ok I've heard 2 stories now!

Where can I find the WA State rules/guidelines for renewing your medical card.

I heard that there is NO renewal, and I've heard its a yearly thing.

Can someone please help me find this information?

Beaglebabe
Yakima

I also would like to see the "facts" to this subject, because i have my card, mine is through a so called "doc in the box" we all no of as THCF, and my card has an expires soon. im considering seeing another "doc" for my renewal of my card. but i would like to know if i realy need to because there shouldnt be an expireation date on these cards-correct? so why would i need to go get another card from another doc if i dont have to... i cant afford the expensive cost yearly for renewal at the moment, due to being out of work. some one clear the air with the facts please.
thanks

G13Smoker

If your authorization has an expiration date, you need to see either that doctor to renew or see another doctor to get another recommendation. The law says that you must be a patient of the recommending healthcare professional.

If your doctor is not going to go to court and affirm that you are their patient that leaves you in a bad spot. If your card is expired, that might be the case. Also, if you want to establish that you are a patient of a doctor (or other healthcare professional that can recommend legally under the law) you probably want to be seeing that doctor at least once a year. Even if your authorization doesn't have an expiration date, if you haven't seen that doctor in a decade, are you really their patient? These are things I wouldn't want unclear going into court, personally.

just one more stupid question and im done. if i do decide to renew threw say another doc, instead of my current card provider, will i have to pay $200 again as if being a new patient, or would i get to pay the "renewal" cost of $150(i believe that was the "renewal" cost threw THCF.) since im already considered a wa state mmj patient? i would be starting all over again? if i find a doc that would prescribe without an expiration date i could understand paying $200, but if they still use an expiration date, ill just stick with my current provider. i dont understand how a card from a so called "doc in the box" could not be legit, i mean a mmj card is legal or else they wouldnt be in bizness right?

According to the statute, there is no expiration date. And, actually seeing a doctor once a year doesn't necessarily equate to a primary care physician. Its ambiguous and if a condition is chronic, it should stay in effect until the condition improves. Some conditions don't need regular doctor visits, some conditions will never be cured but continue to degenerate. So, its a crap shoot depending on the county, the prosecutor and the judge. And there is plenty of bias out there in some jurisdictions. :wtf:

after 10 june, recommendations must be on a special tamper proof paper, so a card by itself may not stand up since it doesn't meet that requirement.

If you received it before 10 june you are grand fathered in.


Whether or not a clinic will charge you $200 if you are already a patient it up to the clinic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gypski

According to the statute, there is no expiration date. And, actually seeing a doctor once a year doesn't necessarily equate to a primary care physician. Its ambiguous and if a condition is chronic, it should stay in effect until the condition improves. Some conditions don't need regular doctor visits, some conditions will never be cured but continue to degenerate. So, its a crap shoot depending on the county, the prosecutor and the judge. And there is plenty of bias out there in some jurisdictions. :wtf:

---

The statute not saying that a recommendation necessarily expires is not equal to, "there is no expiration date."

The law explicitly says you must be a patient of the agent giving the recommendation, not "primary care physician" whatever you mean by that, you must be the doctor's patient.

If you don't see your doctor at least once a year, why would law enforcement believe you are their patient? If you have a serious and debilitating or terminal, chronic condition, why would you not be seeing your doc at least once a year? FFS there are clinics that are charing 50 bucks for a renewal now, you can't shell out $4.33 a month?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by justpics

after 10 june, recommendations must be on a special tamper proof paper, so a card by itself may not stand up since it doesn't meet that requirement.

If you received it before 10 june you are grand fathered in.


Whether or not a clinic will charge you $200 if you are already a patient it up to the clinic.




The statute not saying that a recommendation necessarily expires is not equal to, "there is no expiration date."

The law explicitly says you must be a patient of the agent giving the recommendation, not "primary care physician" whatever you mean by that, you must be the doctor's patient.

If you don't see your doctor at least once a year, why would law enforcement believe you are their patient? If you have a serious and debilitating or terminal, chronic condition, why would you not be seeing your doc at least once a year? FFS there are clinics that are charing 50 bucks for a renewal now, you can't shell out $4.33 a month?

---

You advertising? Not interested. I only pay for a driver's license every 4 years, and don't have to take a test every time. So, what's the difference with a medical authorization?

If the condition still exists according to the most current doctor's records a patient may have, what difference does it make who signed the thing? What if a person's real attending doctor specifically for their condition will not sign but a doc in the box will. Once you have an authorization that under the statue doesn't expire (read as long as the original condition exists) means does not expire. And, any doctor visit related to the condition should still validate the condition still exists regardless of who signed for the medical authorization. Wanna split some more hairs, and continue the ambiguous circle jerk?

The doc in the boxes who want yearly renewals aren't being non-profit, they are requiring a fee for a medical service. If the doc in the box won't go to some area of the state because its not cost effective, its not really being non-profit and compassionate. But, that is just my opinion so let them fight it out in court or what ever when one of their patients gets hauled in and the doc start spending more time in court then signing authorizations.

I'm for cannabis liberation for whatever reason because by all the medical and human science its the right thing to do. :twocents:

Directly from the WA Dept of Health's MMJ Website (Google it)... If your note HAS an Expiration Date ON IT, then it expires on that date. However, they are not required, and usually just put there to keep the doc in a box's wealthy... errrr legitimate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gypski

You advertising? Not interested. I only pay for a driver's license every 4 years, and don't have to take a test every time. So, what's the difference with a medical authorization?

---

A medical authorization allows one to use cannabis to treat certain qualifying medical conditions. A drivers license allows one to operate a motor vehicle. A medical authorization must be issued by a qualified medical professional. A drivers license is issued by the state. The only thing these two things have in common is that they're both legal rights defined by statutes. Using your logic the penalties for murder and shoplifting would need to be the same because they're both illegal under state law.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gypski

If the condition still exists according to the most current doctor's records a patient may have, what difference does it make who signed the thing? What if a person's real attending doctor specifically for their condition will not sign but a doc in the box will. Once you have an authorization that under the statue doesn't expire (read as long as the original condition exists) means does not expire. And, any doctor visit related to the condition should still validate the condition still exists regardless of who signed for the medical authorization. Wanna split some more hairs, and continue the ambiguous circle jerk?

---

People reading this need to be aware that nowhere in the statute does it say that recommendations don't expire. It also doesn't say they do expire. The latest additions to the law do specify that one must have a valid authorization and that medical records will no longer substitute for a valid recommendation. If your authorization has an expiration date then it is very likely invalid after the expiration date.

The closest analogue to a medical marijuana recommendation is a prescription. When a doctor writes a prescription they specify a dosage, the number of pills per refill and how many refills the patient gets on the current prescription. The prescription also has an overall expiration date. These limits are the natural mechanisms that limit the patient to a set duration of treatment. Even for chronic conditions a treating physician is going to expect regular contact with the person to whom they are prescribing medication.

Because a medical marijuana recommendation doesn't allow the physician the natural controls the prescription process provides it is entirely reasonable from both legal and medical perspectives to have a medical marijuana recommendation contain an expiration date.

While it is true that a person with a recommendation without an expiration date could argue their authorization is valid even after an extended period of time, it would in the end be at their doctors discretion as to whether they consider the authorization still valid.

Consider the case of a doctor who wrote a recommendation without an expiration date five years before being contacted by the police to verify the authenticity of his recommendation. A responsible doctor concerned about his own medical and legal liability might not provide the answer the person with the five year old recommendation is looking for. Personally I'd say the expense associated with having a yearly recommendation with clearly defined authorization dates is well worth the 55 cents / day it costs me. Most people spend way more than that on pop or coffee every day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gypski

The doc in the boxes who want yearly renewals aren't being non-profit, they are requiring a fee for a medical service. If the doc in the box won't go to some area of the state because its not cost effective, its not really being non-profit and compassionate.

---

That is absolutely untrue. Fee for service (FFS) activities are not only allowed for not-for-profit organizations, but many social service, rehabilitation and medically oriented not-for-profits consider FFS income to be a major, healthy component of their organization's fiscal health.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gypski

But, that is just my opinion so let them fight it out in court or what ever when one of their patients gets hauled in and the doc start spending more time in court then signing authorizations.

---

In a thread asking for facts it is irresponsible to offer one's unqualified opinion as fact, especially in situations where following that unqualified opinion could cost the reader great expense or time in jail.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gypski

I'm for cannabis liberation for whatever reason because by all the medical and human science its the right thing to do. :twocents:

---

That's fine, so do I, but you shouldn't express how you want things to be as fact in threads asking for facts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gypski

If the condition still exists according to the most current doctor's records a patient may have, what difference does it make who signed the thing? What if a person's real attending doctor specifically for their condition will not sign but a doc in the box will. Once you have an authorization that under the statue doesn't expire (read as long as the original condition exists) means does not expire. And, any doctor visit related to the condition should still validate the condition still exists regardless of who signed for the medical authorization. Wanna split some more hairs, and continue the ambiguous circle jerk?

---

the only reason i went through a doc in the box is because all my med records were from the emergency rooms of two dif hospitals. i dont have a set "family" doctor that i go see regularly because i dont have insurance and i never had one, nore have i ever met a doc that actualy "cared" for each patient, they just collect there pay. and i know neither of the doctors from the ER would have agreed to give me mmj, they only wanted to give me the realy bad shit like vics, oxys, etc. and telling them that i didnt want to be prescribed pills due to a history of abuse with them did not do anything, they just said take it or leave it basicaly. so the doc in the box was the only option.

do i regret it at all being it was from a doc in the box- no. heres my one-time-only run in with the law over mj. i was in a back seat of a friends(another mmj patient through dif doc) car drunk,(we were parked on private prop) we had just finished smoking and had two lady friends in the car as well, when two cops pulled up behind us. when the cops got to the window with there bright ass lights, there was no time to put the shit in the glove box and lock it, but it was still way obvious since the car looked like cheech and chongs impalla on up in smoke:D. so the cops asked us to step out of the car and at first tried to bully us around saying he was gona get us on distribution and intent to sell since we had ladies with us, but once we set the story straight with the facts- which was we only brought 4Gs of purple kush with us because we knew we wouldnt need any more then that and showed him that we were mmj patients and explained that it was only us "medicating", they just made us call a friend to come drive us home and made us come back for the car the next morning.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gypski

You advertising? Not interested. I only pay for a driver's license every 4 years, and don't have to take a test every time. So, what's the difference with a medical authorization?

If the condition still exists according to the most current doctor's records a patient may have, what difference does it make who signed the thing? What if a person's real attending doctor specifically for their condition will not sign but a doc in the box will. Once you have an authorization that under the statue doesn't expire (read as long as the original condition exists) means does not expire. And, any doctor visit related to the condition should still validate the condition still exists regardless of who signed for the medical authorization. Wanna split some more hairs, and continue the ambiguous circle jerk?

The doc in the boxes who want yearly renewals aren't being non-profit, they are requiring a fee for a medical service. If the doc in the box won't go to some area of the state because its not cost effective, its not really being non-profit and compassionate. But, that is just my opinion so let them fight it out in court or what ever when one of their patients gets hauled in and the doc start spending more time in court then signing authorizations.

I'm for cannabis liberation for whatever reason because by all the medical and human science its the right thing to do. :twocents:

---

1: no im not advertising.

2: medical recommendations for marijuana and driver's licenses are not analogous. The closest thing to an authorization is a prescription, the difference being marijuana is schedule 1 so it can't be prescribed. Prescriptions are only valid for a year, what makes you think the procedures governing schedule 1 drugs would be less strict than those governing 2+?

3: its RCW69.51A that says you must be a patient specifically of the agent that is recommending, not my personal opinion, I am merely pointing out that if you go several years without seeing your recommending agent, the courts may not consider that person your doctor.

4: non-profit does not mean what you think it means.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by justpics

1: no im not advertising.

2: medical recommendations for marijuana and driver's licenses are not analogous. The closest thing to an authorization is a prescription, the difference being marijuana is schedule 1 so it can't be prescribed. Prescriptions are only valid for a year, what makes you think the procedures governing schedule 1 drugs would be less strict than those governing 2+?

3: its RCW69.51A that says you must be a patient specifically of the agent that is recommending, not my personal opinion, I am merely pointing out that if you go several years without seeing your recommending agent, the courts may not consider that person your doctor.

4: non-profit does not mean what you think it means.

---

1. If you play by the establishments rules which we all know are unfair and blatantly wrong then you affirm they are your master over your body and mind. In other words they own you. I will do as I have always done and smoke cannabis because its beneficial both medically, and mentally. I'm an independent person and the state does not make my life decisions. I see how they manage what they have been given and its poorly and carelessly done.

2. I don't need a license to drink alcohol. I don't need a license to use cannabis. They are not different, If you don't have your license, you could go to jail, be fined, etc. The same with medical cannabis, if you don't have an authorization, you can go to jail, be fined. I have one, a non-expiration dated one which is good as long as my condition exists. Nothing in the law that says anything different.

3. You and the lawyers can argue the fine points of what a non-profit is. But, if the doc in the boxes are claiming to be health care organizations, then they are outside the parameters of state law unless solely owned by a licensed medical professional. Again, let the doc lawyers fight it out. They are the ones telling us their authorization is good as gold. If not, they are defrauding patients if patients get convicted using their authorizations.

End of story. The MMJ Movement leaders in Washington have totally dropped the ball so they can play along with the political and judicial system. Charlatans all, if they cannot defend and keep medical mj patients out of the court system or can't get the legislature to do the right and humane thing. :twocents:

It all boils down to racketeering. People are getting rich off of this. You don't have to renew your authorization if you don't want to. There's nothing legally that requires it. And legally you don't even need an authorization at all. But for legal reasons, its cheap insurance to cover your ass in case leo decides to make an example out of you.
By the way, welcome back james.lol;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gypski

1. If you play by the establishments rules which we all know are unfair and blatantly wrong then you affirm they are your master over your body and mind. In other words they own you. I will do as I have always done and smoke cannabis because its beneficial both medically, and mentally. I'm an independent person and the state does not make my life decisions. I see how they manage what they have been given and its poorly and carelessly done.

---

If you don't play by the laws, whether you believe they're fair or unfair, you can end up in jail. A person asked for clarification about renewals and the law. Nobody asked about your rationalization for why you think it's ok to ignore the law. People who believe like you do are criminals. The person asking the question was trying to avoid being like you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gypski

2. I don't need a license to drink alcohol. I don't need a license to use cannabis. They are not different, If you don't have your license, you could go to jail, be fined, etc. The same with medical cannabis, if you don't have an authorization, you can go to jail, be fined. I have one, a non-expiration dated one which is good as long as my condition exists. Nothing in the law that says anything different.

---

Above your analogy was regarding driving and medical marijuana. Now your comparing medical marijuana and alcohol. Do you even read what you write? In either case the analogies you use are flawed and people reading this should realize that it is solely your opinion that a non-expiring authorization will protect you.

I have an idea. You post your contact info and I'll turn you into the police. We'll then test your theory on open ended authorizations. We'll soon see if you're sure enough about your opinions to back them up, or if your just a loudmouth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gypski

3. You and the lawyers can argue the fine points of what a non-profit is. But, if the doc in the boxes are claiming to be health care organizations, then they are outside the parameters of state law unless solely owned by a licensed medical professional. Again, let the doc lawyers fight it out. They are the ones telling us their authorization is good as gold. If not, they are defrauding patients if patients get convicted using their authorizations.

---

Again, you're expressing opinions that have not been tested by law and that are solely your own. You tell everyone how it is then you say let the lawyers fight it out. So we should listen to you and then pay lawyers when your advice gets us arrested? Post your personal info. I think you should be the first one to test your theory.

has anyone heard of the "religion" excuse to use mj? i laughed when i heard that one

Ya there are a lot of people who think they can get away with "whatever", but the law is clear enough for me to know that I want a current recommendation from a doctor whom I am a patient of, period. That keeps you protected, you might get away with a "religious" exemption or with a 10 year old recommendation, but that ain't a chance I'd be willing to take.

you said it:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cannasense

I'll turn you into the police. .

---

Yada, yada, yada. You here now rather then bug people at NEC420? I believe you don't know diddly squat about what your talking about. I think your threat should have you banned. Psychobud where are you? :S2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by killerweed420

It all boils down to racketeering. People are getting rich off of this. You don't have to renew your authorization if you don't want to. There's nothing legally that requires it. And legally you don't even need an authorization at all. But for legal reasons, its cheap insurance to cover your ass in case leo decides to make an example out of you.
By the way, welcome back james.lol;)

---

I agree with you completely. And you see how it gets some upset saying you don't need to renew. Of course, there may be legal problems if people have several authorizations with expiration dates or different conditions. But one original for a continuing condition isn't required by law the way the statute ambiguously reads. Only the doc in the box. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gypski

Yada, yada, yada. You here now rather then bug people at NEC420? I believe you don't know diddly squat about what your talking about. I think your threat should have you banned. Psychobud where are you? :S2:

---

It's exactly what I expected. Attach the messenger instead of the message. I don't blame for being afraid to try my test of your theory, but I can't turn you in unless you give me the info, and we both know that's the last thing your going to do.

So don't whine about my offer. If you truly believed what you're saying you'd be more than willing to show everyone just how right you are. But now look at you, you're so afraid of me and what I write that you want me banned.

So keep ducking the issues and attacking me. That'll definitely make you look right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cannasense

It's exactly what I expected. Attach the messenger instead of the message. I don't blame for being afraid to try my test of your theory, but I can't turn you in unless you give me the info, and we both know that's the last thing your going to do.

So don't whine about my offer. If you truly believed what you're saying you'd be more than willing to show everyone just how right you are. But now look at you, you're so afraid of me and what I write that you want me banned.

So keep ducking the issues and attacking me. That'll definitely make you look right.

---

Attach the messenger? How about we attach you to a hot air balloon, and I'm sure you could keep it afloat with all your hot air!! Attack you, no, I'll just ignore you. Why don't you try the test yourself. I don't duck an issue and I take things as they happen. You must actually think I'm worried. I think you are off your rocker and slowly going over the edge. :D

come on guys. what, are we in high school here, do i need to start chanting "fight-fight-fight"? :jointsmile:

"cant we all just get along"? - ha ha ha not in this world

The one, the only,(well maybe not "THE ONLY"):D
G13Budsmoker:jointsmile::rastasmoke::stoned:

There is no expiration date requirement in the law.
Any doctor who puts one on his authorization is
just soaking you for a yearly fee.

Ask LegalBeagle any of your legal questions,
he's a real dedicated professional.
Read his blog or write to him at
Let's Talk About Pot and Cannabis and Medical Marijuana
Primo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by letstalkPrimo

There is no expiration date requirement in the law.
Any doctor who puts one on his authorization is
just soaking you for a yearly fee.

Ask LegalBeagle any of your legal questions,
he's a real dedicated professional.
Read his blog or write to him at
Let's Talk About Pot and Cannabis and Medical Marijuana
Primo

---

There is an error in the very first blog entry. Washington is not like Oregon in that the state requires yearly renewals or re-approval. It is not written anywhere in the Washington State Medical Marijuana Law and no one has produced the contrary yet. And supposedly that is Dr. Orvald saying that. And he also says only he can revoke an authorization. So, is the Legalbeagle a dog that hunts the true facts or sniffs for clues to the truth? :smokin:

As it is with any med it is pretty much either traditional or by procedure that the regular docs would want to have a medicine review at least once a year with a patient. So I think it is the same as the standard for for regular docs. We are patients and we have authorizations for MMJ and the doc needs to re-evauate, as a standard of normal care or the Docs stand to risk more. Another brick in the wall, maybe. Meh, get in line and become compliant, I guess.:jointsmile:

Peace
Muggles1

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Muggles1

As it is with any med it is pretty much either traditional or by procedure that the regular docs would want to have a medicine review at least once a year with a patient. So I think it is the same as the standard for for regular docs. We are patients and we have authorizations for MMJ and the doc needs to re-evauate, as a standard of normal care or the Docs stand to risk more. Another brick in the wall, maybe. Meh, get in line and become compliant, I guess.:jointsmile:

Peace
Muggles1

---

yes, quoted for truth. Keep your doctor patient relationship unquestionable in the eyes of your potential future judge, and protect your affirmative defense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Muggles1

As it is with any med it is pretty much either traditional or by procedure that the regular docs would want to have a medicine review at least once a year with a patient. So I think it is the same as the standard for for regular docs. We are patients and we have authorizations for MMJ and the doc needs to re-evauate, as a standard of normal care or the Docs stand to risk more. Another brick in the wall, maybe. Meh, get in line and become compliant, I guess.:jointsmile:

Peace
Muggles1

---

The IBS/Crohns bathroom card has no expiration requirement.

Signed by a doc, for qualifying conditions. No need for a yearly evaluation -- since it is a life long chronic illness. The card came into being from a bathroom access law being passed.

So inherently, I believe you are wrong. Yes there's no med, but it's about a condition that is life long -- therefore no need to re-examine once a diagnosis is made.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jackmillions

The IBS/Crohns bathroom card has no expiration requirement.

Signed by a doc, for qualifying conditions. No need for a yearly evaluation -- since it is a life long chronic illness. The card came into being from a bathroom access law being passed.

So inherently, I believe you are wrong. Yes there's no med, but it's about a condition that is life long -- therefore no need to re-examine once a diagnosis is made.

---

While the condition may be lifetime, treatment is not. Medicine keeps changing and new treatments become more popular while others are discarded. Renewing the mmj recommendation when you have a chronic illness is a relatively cheap insurance policy, and isn't it worthwhile spending a bit of your time and money to lower the likelihood of legal issues down the road?

My recommendation doesnt have an expiration date, but I went through my PCP. I've been seeing him for about 3 years for nerve damage from a broken neck and herniated disk, L4,L5, those conditions wont improve but I'll be seeing him at least yearly for updates. Better safe than sorry for $113.58.

Thanks for ALL of the comments!!!

I sent an email to
Kelley R Cargil
Customer Service Lead
Office of Customer Service
WA State Dept of Health
Ph 360-236-4774
Fax 360-236-4818
Visit our website Health Systems Quality Assurance Main Page - WA State Dept. of Health

This was her reply-



Good afternoon Carol-

The law does not require the recommendation to have an expiration date. The recommendation only expires if the health care provider has included an expiration date on it. Please have her discuss this with her health care provider.

More information is available on our website. I recommend reading the frequently asked questions from the link below. Thank you and please let me know if you have additional questions.

Link: Medical Marijuana Frequently Asked Questions - Washington State Dept of Health

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by beaglebabe

Thanks for ALL of the comments!!!

I sent an email to
Kelley R Cargil
Customer Service Lead
Office of Customer Service
WA State Dept of Health
Ph 360-236-4774
Fax 360-236-4818
Visit our website Health Systems Quality Assurance Main Page - WA State Dept. of Health

This was her reply-



Good afternoon Carol-

The law does not require the recommendation to have an expiration date. The recommendation only expires if the health care provider has included an expiration date on it. Please have her discuss this with her health care provider.

More information is available on our website. I recommend reading the frequently asked questions from the link below. Thank you and please let me know if you have additional questions.

Link: Medical Marijuana Frequently Asked Questions - Washington State Dept of Health

---

Even this won't stop the renew advocates. :D

I don't think anyone is saying you have to get a new card very year if yours doesn't have an expiration. What I am at least saying is that you need to have a real doctor patient relationship.

Ask the DoH if an authorization from 1999 without an expiration date, from a doctor you no longer see, who is no longer up to date on your current medical needs will still be valid. That's the question. Not whether or not the paperwork has to be redone every year, that isn't needed, but does that paperwork need to be from a current doctor who is treating you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by justpics

I don't think anyone is saying you have to get a new card very year if yours doesn't have an expiration. What I am at least saying is that you need to have a real doctor patient relationship.

Ask the DoH if an authorization from 1999 without an expiration date, from a doctor you no longer see, who is no longer up to date on your current medical needs will still be valid. That's the question. Not whether or not the paperwork has to be redone every year, that isn't needed, but does that paperwork need to be from a current doctor who is treating you?

---

RCW 69.51A.030 states:

A physician licensed under chapter 18.71 or 18.57 RCW shall be excepted from the state's criminal laws and shall not be penalized in any manner, or denied any right or privilege, for:

(1) Advising a qualifying patient about the risks and benefits of medical use of marijuana or that the qualifying patient may benefit from the medical use of marijuana where such use is within a professional standard of care or in the individual physician's medical judgment; or

(2) Providing a qualifying patient with valid documentation, based upon the physician's assessment of the qualifying patient's medical history and current medical condition, that the medical use of marijuana may benefit a particular qualifying patient.

In order to be in compliance with this section, and benefit from the protections it offers, a health care professional's recommendation must be based not only on the patient's qualifying condition (medical records) but also their current medical condition.

It becomes more and more difficult for the authorizing health care professional to claim that their recommendation is based on the patient's current condition, when there is large gap of time between the date the recommendation was made and when it became necessary for the patient to prove they are legal.

So while the recommendation without an expiration date may be valid, it is up to the recommending health care professional to attest to it's validity.

Especially with the new requirements that require the recommendation be on tamper resistant paper with at least a date of issue, it seems naive to rely on the police or prosecutor to not check with the issuing health care professional as to the validity of an open-ended recommendation.

If you believe your recommending health care professional will put their license and freedom on the line for someone they last saw in the distant past then take the Dept. of Health at face value and rest assured that your open-ended recommendation will keep you safe.

Personally I'll take the sure thing of at least yearly contact with my authorizing health care professional.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by justpics

I don't think anyone is saying you have to get a new card very year if yours doesn't have an expiration. What I am at least saying is that you need to have a real doctor patient relationship.

Ask the DoH if an authorization from 1999 without an expiration date, from a doctor you no longer see, who is no longer up to date on your current medical needs will still be valid. That's the question. Not whether or not the paperwork has to be redone every year, that isn't needed, but does that paperwork need to be from a current doctor who is treating you?

---

The validity question would be determined by a court... DoH info is useful, but not legally binding. I think we are pretty much all agreed that by letter of the law the authorization would be valid... but it would be needlessly risky to depend on it when your freedom or money are on the line.

The " ONLY" operative part of the statute which applies to all "qualifying patients" is here:

(a) Is a patient of a physician licensed under chapter 18.71 or 18.57 RCW;

(b) Has been diagnosed by that physician as having a terminal or debilitating medical condition;

(c) Is a resident of the state of Washington at the time of such diagnosis;

(D) Has been advised by that physician about the risks and benefits of the medical use of marijuana; and

(e) Has been advised by that physician that they may benefit from the medical use of marijuana.

The 1 yr. issue is ad hoc by all whom use it, refer to it or even acknowledge it because it doesn't apply to any patients and is completely horditory...it could be seen as applying to practitioners whom sign as guidelines only when applied to any qualifying patient under the act...the act requires no more.

Washington courts have made it clear any criminal defendant cannot be found guilty for due process violations...the legislature never carved out any criminal liability for anyone of common-sense to glean from rcw 69.51A that a signed 1 yr. end date document is conduct which is criminal if not renewed or the end date has passed by....it "ONLY" requires one to have a washington licensed practitioner sign for a valid authorized condition(s) noted by the MQAC.

So logically speaking here, most clinics in wa. are Independent Medical Exams because one is required to already have a "diagnosis" BY A WA. ST. practitioner which differentiates from the norms of medical practice the act was intended for..i.e. qualifying patients specialized practitioner or general practitioner whom diagnosed the patient, which all mmj clinics in wa. require before seen..

The question then would logically be, does the clinic operate under the correct laws in order to establish the relationship of the signing practitione ?

The logical answer to this question would most likely be no. Because you pay the clinic owner whom is not a medical practitioner and not the practitioner whom is signing the authorization...wa. has a public policy that this shall not occur as it is fee-splitting which degrades the medical profession...

It would be arbitrary, capricious, ad-hoc enforcement otherwise of a 1 yr. mandate...

I do see why most think it is a "good-idea", the problem is, it isn't the law nor do the plain words of the act contain it. :wtf:

You know james, I too used to be into necrophilia, sado-masochism and beastiality, but then I realized, I was just beating a dead horse.:beatdeadhorse:


let it rest.

CARDS ARE NOT VALID IN WA STATE. ONLY TAMPER PROOF DOCUMNETATION W/ THE RCW STATUE ON IT,PLUS MORE ITEMS ARE REQUIRED TO BE A LEGAL DOCUMENTATION FOR MMJ. AS FAR AS A YEARLY RENEWEL,I WILL GET MINE RENEWED EVERY YEAR,WHY TAKE THE RISK OF GETTING IN TROUBLE AND FIGHTING IT IN COURT,IS IT REALLY WORTH IT?? NOT FOR ME!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tango244ns

CARDS ARE NOT VALID IN WA STATE. ONLY TAMPER PROOF DOCUMNETATION W/ THE RCW STATUE ON IT,PLUS MORE ITEMS ARE REQUIRED TO BE A LEGAL DOCUMENTATION FOR MMJ. AS FAR AS A YEARLY RENEWEL,I WILL GET MINE RENEWED EVERY YEAR,WHY TAKE THE RISK OF GETTING IN TROUBLE AND FIGHTING IT IN COURT,IS IT REALLY WORTH IT?? NOT FOR ME!

---

For all new patients, yes tamper proof paper. For all others, the original authorization meets the standards and the letter of the law. Be scared into paying a yearly fee when you are not required by law, if you want. If you are sick, you are sick so what's your worry? If it went to the state budget, I'd pay a nominal fee, but to a doc in the box for profit, no way Jose. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by justpics

You know james, I too used to be into necrophilia, sado-masochism and beastiality, but then I realized, I was just beating a dead horse.:beatdeadhorse:


let it rest.

---

Sorry justpics,

I have never been into any of that which you mentioned. My response if you look at how the courts in all mmj states are ruling about the part of the acts which actually have any teeth and not just meaningless words which don't apply. They are horditory.

So not beating any dead horses, just giving a showing of reality which most miss here. Not leo scare tactics here. And the tamper proof documents just mean it satisfies the part in rcw 69.51A just like 69.50.308(e) prescription/vaild order of practitioner for medical purposes. As you should also note, the TP document only requires a "start" date, not a start and stop date i.e. 1 yr.

My primary care says the end date is invalid for regular practitioners whom have diagnosed for any of the life long conditions unless they don't trust their own medical judgement in the first place. life long chronic conditions do not revert back to normal after a true diagnosis in western medicine..i.e. cured!!


P.S. I no longer use any doc-in-the-box since the state made me aware they are not lawfully providing services. I use my regular practitioner.

The only thing you're missing the james is that you also have to have tried regular prescriptions for whatever your ailment is and they haven't worked.
So if you've been prescribed narcotics or nsaids and they make you throw up you're covered. A lot of people are opiate intolerant and can't take the regularly prescribed medications. And the synthetics usually aren't very good either.