According to Prof. Murray, a psychiatrist: patients with mental illness were often regular cannabis users (related to Andrew’s article).
A majority of MP’s supported downgrading cannabis from a class B to C drug. Junior Home Office Minister said it was an “honest and credible” attempt to tackle issues related to drug-use.
The article about Andrew describes an ‘intensely bright’ boy who completely changed after a trip to New Zealand where he smoked ‘a fair amount of dope’. After telling his mother that he was ‘God’, he became a psychiatric patient. Buying weed within the ward was easy, consequently – he fled to Paris. After being sent home by the British Embassy and then sent to a private clinic in London; he is managing without weed ‘for the first time’.
Andrew’s article shows cannabis being readily available, almost anywhere. It also shows what psychological effects cannabis can have on teenagers. Consequences of abusing this drug and clearly defined – Andrew was ‘hungry’, ‘exhausted’ and completely ‘wiped out’ by the experience.
Connie’s article is about legalising Cannabis and other ‘harder’ drugs to stop violent crime ‘fuelled by the drugs trade’. She says that making purified drugs available would make taking them safer and would reduce crime (especially on elderly people). It states that many people are frightened to even go outside because of all the muggings that happen. Legalising would also mean that the drug would get to the user pure (free from contaminants).
Andrew’s article is biased because it is written from the parent’s point of view. Naturally, they want the best for their son and anything that happens to him will be ‘magnified’ because his health is their main priority. They had ‘begged’ the security officers to not take Andrew to the hospital – showing they care very much for his well-being.
Connie’s article is biased because she mainly considers the elderly. Being elderly herself, she can relate to the issue easily and maybe not see it from another perspective (e.g. youth/middle-aged) so easily. She only describes the elderly being ‘terrified’ and doesn’t show an example of any other age group.
I was surprised by the effect cannabis can have on a person (in Andrew’s article), and how an ‘intensely bright’ boy can be changed to someone suffering from ‘cannabis-induced psychosis’. I was also surprised at how easy it was for Andrew to get the drug – even on the ward. This article shows the serious problems related to cannabis abuse, and what it can lead to. It also shows that there is a ‘laid-back’ attitude towards cannabis, as the parents already knew that Andrew smoked ‘joints’ before and had not taken any obvious action to stop it.
I think that Connie’s ideas on Cannabis and other drugs are controversial. Legalising Cannabis is one way to stop crime, but there must be another way. By making Cannabis legal, there will surly be more cases like Andrew’s – this certainly isn’t what should happen. Connie says that disruption caused by alcohol is the same as that of cannabis, but psychological problems cannot occur from drinking alcohol – only from the smoking of cannabis.
I think that the government needs to reconsider the downgrading of cannabis, with cases like Andrew’s, how could making the drug ‘less dangerous’ in the eyes of teenagers be a right move to take. Teenagers think that the risks involved in taking cannabis are much less than of other drugs, their attitude is that it’s ‘ok’ and just like a cigarette.
More money should be put into educating children from a younger age about the dangers of cannabis. The answer might be to start a campaign of hard-hitting television/poster commercials, showing the real dangers of smoking cannabis. Also there should be more people for teenagers to talk to about their problems, and cannabis shouldn’t be frowned upon so much by adults, as this is a fundamental problem of modern society.
