WA State Card Renew

[beaglebabe]

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

beaglebabe Reviewed by beaglebabe on 07-01-2010. 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 Rating: 5

[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.

[G13budsmoker]

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

[justpics]

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.

[G13budsmoker]

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?

[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:

[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.

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?

[gypski]

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:

[ZionsLion]

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.

[cannasense]

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.