South Dakota 2022 Regular Session

South Dakota Senate Bill SB26

Introduced
1/11/22  
Refer
1/11/22  
Report Pass
1/21/22  
Engrossed
1/25/22  
Refer
2/15/22  
Report Pass
3/1/22  
Enrolled
3/3/22  

Caption

Revise the definition of practitioner for purposes of the medical cannabis program.

Impact

The change in definition has significant implications for state law and the medical cannabis program. It may lead to more regulated and standardized practices among healthcare professionals prescribing cannabis. By clearly defining the practitioner-patient relationship, the bill could facilitate better patient care and efficacy in treatment plans involving cannabis. This clarity is also anticipated to reduce incidences of misuse and improve compliance with existing laws governing medical cannabis in South Dakota.

Summary

Senate Bill 26 aims to revise the definition of 'practitioner' within the framework of the medical cannabis program in South Dakota. The bill clarifies who can qualify as a practitioner authorized to prescribe cannabis for medical use. This includes specific roles such as physicians and advanced practice registered nurses, ensuring they have the proper credentials to assess and treat patients using medical cannabis. By refining this definition, the legislation seeks to establish clearer guidelines for practitioners involved in the program, which can enhance the overall regulatory environment for medical cannabis in the state.

Sentiment

The sentiments surrounding SB 26 appear to be predominantly positive among those advocating for medical cannabis use. Supporters of the bill, including health professionals, view the refinement of the definition as a necessary step towards professionalizing and legitimizing the medical cannabis program. Conversely, some critics may express concerns about access to care, particularly if the criteria for practitioners become overly restrictive, which could hinder patients' ability to receive necessary treatments.

Contention

The primary contention revolves around the balance between regulatory oversight and patient access to medical cannabis. Detractors may argue that creating a more stringent definition of practitioners might limit the number of qualified professionals able to assist patients. This could lead to accessibility issues for patients in need of cannabis for debilitating medical conditions. Additionally, the bill’s modifications could spark debates about the extent of governmental regulation in healthcare and medication usage, particularly in terms of personal rights and medical freedoms.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

SD HB1057

Prohibit the unauthorized transfer of cannabis and cannabis products by a medical cannabis cardholder to another person.

SD HB1101

Repeal provisions related to medical marijuana.

MS HB976

Sellers of alternative nicotine products and package retailers; require to have a third-party age verification service.

SD SB24

Establish a maximum number of cannabis plants that may be cultivated by a medical cannabis cardholder.

SD HB1004

Prohibit cardholder cultivation of medical cannabis.

SD SB42

Modify provisions related to medical cannabis.

TX HB3785

Relating to authorizing the possession, use, cultivation, distribution, transportation, and delivery of cannabis for medical purposes; authorizing fees.

TX SB1839

Relating to authorizing the possession, use, cultivation, distribution, transportation, and delivery of cannabis for medical purposes; authorizing fees.