Good Samaritan Embraces Medical Marijuana?

While Samaritan Health Services, the largest healthcare provider in the mid-valley area, has no policy against medical marijuana, patients and former staff have protested what they perceive as unfair treatment of medical marijuana patients. While some doctors are uncomfortable with prescribing it, Samaritan insists that it does not tell its physicians how to treat patients. This issue is not unique to Samaritan Health Services, as doctors in Oregon and beyond are forcing patients to choose between medical marijuana and painkillers.

Samaritan Health Services denies claims of unfair treatment of medical marijuana patients

Samaritan Health Services has denied claims of unfair treatment of medical marijuana patients. This comes after a handful of demonstrators protested outside the Good Samaritan Regional Medical Center, claiming that the hospital's parent company, Samaritan Health Services, was unfairly treating medical marijuana patients.

One of the protestors, Mamie Hobbs of Albany, said she uses marijuana to treat chronic pain from arthritis and injuries sustained in a car accident. However, she claimed that her Samaritan doctor was not comfortable prescribing it and that she had to go elsewhere for a recommendation.

In response to these claims, Julie Manning, Samaritan's executive vice president for marketing and development, stated that the company does not dictate how its physicians treat patients and has no policy against medicinal marijuana. She insisted that the decision to prescribe medical marijuana is between the prescriber and the patient.

Additionally, Randy Day, the compliance officer for the Oregon Medical Board, stated that the issue of doctors forcing Oregon Medical Marijuana Program cardholders to choose between cannabis and painkillers is not unique to Samaritan Health Services. This trend has been observed across the state.

Samaritan Health Services also denied claims of retaliation against employees who advocated for medical marijuana. One former employee, Glick, claimed he was fired in 2006 for refusing to take a drug test, which he believed was due to his outspoken support for medical marijuana use. However, Samaritan has denied that his dismissal was related to his advocacy.

Samaritan Health Services has no policy against medicinal marijuana

Despite federal laws prohibiting cannabis, an increasing number of states have enacted medical cannabis laws. This has resulted in hospitals being asked to create policies accommodating patient use of medicinal marijuana. Samaritan Health Services, the largest healthcare provider in the mid-valley area, has faced protests by patients claiming unfair treatment of medical marijuana users. However, Samaritan Health Services has no written or unwritten policy against medicinal marijuana.

Samaritan Health Services operates five hospitals and dozens of clinics across several counties. While it does not have a policy against medicinal marijuana, some patients have experienced difficulty in obtaining recommendations for medical marijuana from their Samaritan physicians. Patients like Mamie Hobbs, who uses marijuana to treat chronic pain, have had to seek recommendations from doctors outside of the Samaritan Health Services network.

In response to the protests, Samaritan's executive vice president for marketing and development, Julie Manning, affirmed that the company does not dictate how its physicians treat patients. She reiterated that Samaritan Health Services has no policy against medicinal marijuana. The decision to prescribe medical marijuana is left to the discretion of individual prescribers and their patients.

The issue of medical marijuana use in hospitals is complex. While some states have legalized medical cannabis, it remains illegal under federal law. Hospitals risk losing federal funding and facing penalties if they are found to be in violation of federal laws. This conflict between state and federal laws creates a challenging situation for hospitals striving to comply with the law while also meeting the needs of their patients.

The debate surrounding medical marijuana continues, with advocates emphasizing its benefits in reducing patient dependence on opioids for chronic pain management. However, there are also concerns about potential drug interactions and the lack of recognized suppliers of medicinal cannabis. Samaritan Health Services, like many healthcare providers, is navigating the complexities of this evolving landscape, striving to balance legal, ethical, and medical considerations in the absence of a clear consensus.

Patients are forced to choose between marijuana and opioids

In the United States, the use of cannabis for medical purposes is a highly debated topic. Despite the federal Schedule I status of cannabis, 28 states and Washington, DC, have enacted medical cannabis laws, with an additional 16 states enacting cannabidiol (CBD)-specific laws. This has led to hospitals in more states being asked to create cannabis policies as voters decriminalize cannabis for medical use.

One such example is the Good Samaritan Regional Medical Center, where a group of demonstrators recently protested what they claimed was unfair treatment of medical marijuana patients by the hospital's parent company, Samaritan Health Services. While Samaritan officials deny the claim, patients like Mamie Hobbs, who uses marijuana to treat chronic pain, have shared their struggles with getting the necessary medical recommendations. Hobbs shared that her Samaritan doctor does not feel comfortable prescribing medical marijuana, forcing her to seek an alternative opinion.

This situation is not unique to Good Samaritan Health Services and has been a growing trend, as noted by Randy Day, the compliance officer for the Oregon Medical Board. Doctors are increasingly asking patients to choose between cannabis and opioid painkillers, even when the use of marijuana has helped patients reduce their dependence on opioids. This trend is particularly concerning for patients who rely on marijuana to manage their pain and avoid the addictive and harmful side effects of opioids.

The American Cannabis Nurses Association has spoken out against this practice, stating that patients should not be placed in a position where they have to choose between treatment options. Instead, they should have access to the option that best suits their needs. This sentiment is echoed by patients who have shared their struggles with mental health, noting that they are often forced to choose between their psychiatric medications and pain relievers. As mental health conditions worsen, particularly during the pandemic, this choice can have devastating consequences, including an increase in illicit drug use and suicides.

The relationship between marijuana and opioids has been the subject of several studies. Research suggests that the availability of cannabis may decrease opioid consumption and influence patients to opt for marijuana over opioids. This is supported by surveys and studies that found a reduction in opioid use and overdose rates following the legalization of medical marijuana. These findings highlight the potential benefits of medical marijuana in reducing opioid dependence and improving patient outcomes.

Doctors are uncomfortable prescribing marijuana

While an increasing number of states have legalized medical cannabis, it is still illegal under federal law. This discrepancy between federal and state laws places doctors in a challenging position, as they could be found to be aiding and abetting the acquisition of marijuana, which may result in the revocation of their DEA license and even prison time. Hospitals, too, face enormous risks, as they could lose federal funding and face penalties.

The regulatory, legal, and research status of cannabis also leaves many physicians uncomfortable. Cannabis has become available as a medical treatment without the stringent research usually required by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for medications to enter the market. This means that there is a lack of evidence about its efficacy as a treatment, and physicians are unable to predict or control dosages. In addition, there has been very little medical education about cannabis for health care professionals, which has resulted in many doctors feeling unprepared to prescribe it.

Furthermore, the influx of "pot docs" in states where medicinal marijuana is legal has led to concerns about the commercialization of medical marijuana recommendations. These are physicians who primarily treat ailments for which marijuana is recommended, and they often advertise their businesses as being centered on medicinal marijuana. This goes against the beliefs of those who advocated for the medicalization of marijuana in the first place, as they believed it would only be available to a limited number of people with debilitating conditions.

The conflicting laws and lack of research and education about cannabis use have likely contributed to the discomfort many doctors feel when it comes to prescribing medical marijuana.

Samaritan Health Services fired an employee for refusing to take a drug test

In the United States, the legality of drug testing depends on state law. While private employers are generally not required to test employees or applicants for drugs or alcohol, state laws typically allow employers to drug test employees in certain situations. Samaritan Health Services, a healthcare provider with multiple hospitals and clinics, conducts an average of 50 drug tests per day, screening for drugs like marijuana, opiates, methamphetamine, and cocaine.

Samaritan Health Services has been accused of unfair treatment of medical marijuana patients by protestors. Demonstrators have claimed that doctors are forcing Oregon Medical Marijuana Program cardholders to choose between cannabis and painkillers. However, Samaritan's executive vice president for marketing and development, Julie Manning, has denied the presence of any policy against medicinal marijuana.

In 2006, an employee of Samaritan Health Services, Glick, was fired when he refused to take a drug test. Glick had worked for the company for 15 years and was an outspoken advocate for medical marijuana. While Samaritan denies that Glick's dismissal was related to his advocacy, he claims that he was fired in retaliation for his support of medical marijuana.

According to legal sources, employers in certain states can require employees to submit to drug testing under specific circumstances. Employers may also conduct their own onsite drug testing, but these tests cannot confirm a positive result and require additional testing at a qualified collection center. If an individual refuses to take a drug test, they can be fired, as refusing to submit to a test is grounds for termination in states that allow employer drug testing.

Frequently asked questions