medical marijuana laws
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

121
(FIVE YEARS 33)

H-INDEX

31
(FIVE YEARS 4)

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (6) ◽  
pp. 34
Author(s):  
Wendy N. Buice ◽  
Steven V. Cates

Recent changes in state laws have legalized marijuana use for their state citizens. Originally by 2016, twenty-six states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico had legalized marijuana for medical use (State Medical Marijuana Laws, 2016). In the 2020 elections eighteen states, two U.S. territories, and the District of Columbia legalized recreational use of cannabis. We now have thirty-six states, four U.S. territories, and D.C. who have legalized medical use of the drug use (State Medical Marijuana Laws, 2021). This however creates some major issues for Human Resource professionals due to the fact that federal law still considers marijuana use illegal. This creates a confusing situation for organizations and especially Human Resource professionals who must create and enforce policies on the use of prescription and non-prescription drugs within the work environment. The purpose of this research is to determine if medical marijuana should be protected in the workplace and under what conditions. Based on the literature three research questions were posed and three hypotheses were tested based on analyzing data from a survey questionnaire that was completed by 57 working adults. Results indicate that they support the use of medical marijuana as a viable medical treatment and companies should recognize and support this medical remedy. Results indicate employees should be protected in their use of marijuana under the FMLA. Results also indicate marijuana should also be considered for long-term and permanent illnesses under the ADA. Implications are employees see marijuana in a positive light, as a viable medical treatment, and expect human resource management to support policies that allow for use of marijuana.


Author(s):  
Lindsay N. Calkins ◽  
Alexander J. Ryan ◽  
Thomas J. Zlatoper

Cannabis ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-68
Author(s):  
Abhery Das ◽  
Julie Johnson ◽  
Gregory Hard ◽  
Abenaa Jones

Objective. Although cigarette use has declined among adolescents, marijuana use has increased in subgroups of this population. The association between medical marijuana laws (MMLs) and cigarette initiation among adolescents, however, needs further examination. We investigated the association between MMLs and age of cigarette initiation and stratified findings by gender, race/ethnicity, and state dispensary status. Method. Data were from N=939,725 adolescents in 9th-12th grade living in 46 states who participated in the Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System between 1991-2015. Participants were asked the age they first smoked a cigarette and other sociodemographic characteristics. States were categorized as MML states if they had legalized marijuana for medicinal purposes by 2015. We used a difference-in-difference methodology and logistic regressions to assess the relationship between MMLs and cigarette initiation. Results. Our results indicate lower odds of initiating cigarettes, in every age group (8 years old or younger, 9-10, 11-12, 13-14, 15-16, 17 years old or older) in states with MMLs when compared to non-MML states. After stratification, we find lower odds of cigarette initiation in certain age groups by gender, race/ethnicity, and state dispensary status. We report no difference in state MML implementation and age of cigarette initiation among Hispanic adolescents in every age group, and Black adolescents 8 years or younger and 17 years or older. Conclusions. Cigarette initiation has decreased among adolescents in MML states compared with those in non-MML states. Further research should evaluate how MMLs and recreational marijuana policies are associated with e-cigarette initiation and use.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu-Wei Chu ◽  
S Gershenson

Medical marijuana laws (MMLs) represent a major change of marijuana policy in the U.S. Previous research shows that these laws increase marijuana use among adults. In this paper, we estimate the effects of MMLs on secondary and post-secondary students’ time use using data from the American Time Use Survey. We apply a difference-in-differences research design and estimate flexible fixed effects models that condition on state fixed effects and state-specific time trends. We find no effect of MMLs on secondary students’ time use. However, we find that college students in MML states spend approximately 20% less time on education-related activities and 20% more time on leisure activities than their counterparts in non-MML states. These behavioral responses largely occur during weekends and summer when students have more spare time. Finally, the impacts of MMLs are heterogeneous and stronger among part-time college students, who are more likely to be first-generation college goers and to come from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups. © This manuscript version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu-Wei Chu ◽  
S Gershenson

Medical marijuana laws (MMLs) represent a major change of marijuana policy in the U.S. Previous research shows that these laws increase marijuana use among adults. In this paper, we estimate the effects of MMLs on secondary and post-secondary students’ time use using data from the American Time Use Survey. We apply a difference-in-differences research design and estimate flexible fixed effects models that condition on state fixed effects and state-specific time trends. We find no effect of MMLs on secondary students’ time use. However, we find that college students in MML states spend approximately 20% less time on education-related activities and 20% more time on leisure activities than their counterparts in non-MML states. These behavioral responses largely occur during weekends and summer when students have more spare time. Finally, the impacts of MMLs are heterogeneous and stronger among part-time college students, who are more likely to be first-generation college goers and to come from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups. © This manuscript version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu-Wei Chu

Medical marijuana laws generate significant debate regarding drug policy. For instance, if marijuana is a complement to hard drugs, then these laws would increase the usage not only of marijuana but also of hard drugs. In this paper I study empirically the effects of medical marijuana laws by analyzing data on drug arrests and treatment admissions. I find that medical marijuana laws increase these proxies for marijuana consumption by around 10–15 percent. However, there is no evidence that cocaine and heroin usage increases. From the arrest data, the estimates indicate a 0–15 percent decrease in possession arrests for cocaine and heroin combined. From the treatment data, the estimates show a 20 percent decrease in admissions for heroin-related treatment, although there is no significant effect for cocaine-related treatment. These results suggest that marijuana may be a substitute for heroin, but it is not strongly correlated with cocaine. © 2015 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu-Wei Chu

Medical marijuana laws generate significant debate regarding drug policy. For instance, if marijuana is a complement to hard drugs, then these laws would increase the usage not only of marijuana but also of hard drugs. In this paper I study empirically the effects of medical marijuana laws by analyzing data on drug arrests and treatment admissions. I find that medical marijuana laws increase these proxies for marijuana consumption by around 10–15 percent. However, there is no evidence that cocaine and heroin usage increases. From the arrest data, the estimates indicate a 0–15 percent decrease in possession arrests for cocaine and heroin combined. From the treatment data, the estimates show a 20 percent decrease in admissions for heroin-related treatment, although there is no significant effect for cocaine-related treatment. These results suggest that marijuana may be a substitute for heroin, but it is not strongly correlated with cocaine. © 2015 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document