Quote Originally Posted by senorx12562
The decision in Clendenin casts some doubt on the effectiveness of "affirmative defense" actions taken by dispensaries to try to help cover the growers. Short of an agreement with the patient(s), or photos of the grower cooking dinner for the patient, the grower's status just got a little more precarious. As to the idea of "certified" growers, who does the certifying and what are the standards to be, etc..? Without answers to these questions, no opinion. I can tell you that the idea of the government being involved at all on any level makes it unpalatable to me.
Good idea about the cooking photos. I am thinking pot luck. What would constitute "do more to manage the health and well-being of a patient who has a debilitating medical condition than merely supply marijuana?" Take their dogs for walkies? Seriously, I have driven my patients for their doctors appointment, and had some over for dinner - do I need to document this somehow? and notarized? Apparently that means more court cases to come thanks to Clendenin...

I agree, no one wants government involvement, but I think as this industry grows, regulations of some sort will follow...
colagal Reviewed by colagal on . Patient collaboration and Grower certification The question to Sensible Colorado (in response to their request for public input on regulations): Does Sensible Colorado have an opinion regarding growers? Many of the dispensaries rely upon growers (who are separate from dispensaries) to help supply the meds due to supply and demand, but growers are restricted in what they can grow based upon their number of patients. Both the growers and the dispensaries have to show enough patient load (if you will) to justify the amount of product on Rating: 5