Steven Yoon

Professor Wilson

Writing 2

27 February 2017

Writing Project 2

The legalization of marijuana is a topic that remains prevalent in todays society. Having

grown up in Southern California, I was exposed to an environment where marijuana and its uses

were common. The recent passing of Proposition 64, which allows the recreational use of

marijuana for adults 21 and older, led me to question how marijuana legalization would affect

my life. Two academic sources provided an interesting perspectives on this issue: Legalization

of medical marijuana and marijuana use among youths by Bettina Friese and Joel W. Grube,

and Marijuana Legalization: Impact on Physicians and Public Health by Wilkinson, Samuel T.,

Stephanie Yarnell, Rajiv Radhakrishnan, Samuel A. Ball, and Deepak Cyril D'Souza. While

Marijuana use among youths is a sociological academic discipline that analyzes the potential

impact of marijuana legalization on youth, Impact on Physicians and Public Health is a

biological approach, which explains the eminent health issues related to the decriminalization.

Although both articles approach the legalization through different research methods and

disciplines, they both attempt to illustrate the potential impact. Whether they explain how the

legalization of medical marijuana increases the likelihood of marijuana use or cause health

issues, each agree that the decriminalization of marijuana can be harmful to the youth and the

society.
 The article, Legalization of medical marijuana and marijuana use among youths

approaches the legalization of marijuana through a sociological discipline, which discusses how

marijuana legalization can lead to social issues such as automobile accidents. The authors

examine the relationship between marijuana use and marijuana norms among the youth. First,

they introduce their arguments by explaining the increased availability of medical marijuana in

the United States and continue by showing the strong correlation between voting intentions for

marijuana legalization and marijuana use attitudes. For example, A study that examined whether

the legalization of medical marijuana changed attitudes and marijuana use in California

concluded that policy changes were a result of attitudes rather than attitudes being a reflection of

policy change (Khatapoush & Hallfors, 2004). He highlights the social impact of the

legalization, explaining that an increase in marijuana use implies that the drug is safe and

normative to the society. Because the youth is exposed and raised in an environment where

marijuana is common, it is more likely they are accustomed to the use and disregard the negative

outcomes, such as the use of other illicit drugs. This attitude is the beginning of social problems

and the authors clarify that it is more common in states that have already legalized marijuana and

people are more open-minded to the law, as seen in This same study found that youths from

states with medical marijuana laws perceived marijuana use to be less risky. The findings of the

study suggest that the normative environment can play a significant role in peoples attitudes

towards the legalization.

Meanwhile in Marijuana Legalization: Impact on Physicians and Public Health, the

authors focus on the biological perspective of the legalization and health problems related to it.

Direct outcomes of marijuana legalization and its negative effect on individuals health is

highlighted in a chart, which includes addiction, impaired cognition and mental illnesses. For
example, Marijuana intoxication is associated with transient psychosis-like effects, including

paranoia, ideas of reference, flight of ideas, pressured thought, disorganized thinking,

persecutory or grandiose delusions, and auditory/visual hallucinations (46). The authors display

a biological approach by referring to experiments showing the direct results of marijuana use.

Moreover, they articulate on the consequences of marijuana use, rather than the

decriminalization because legalization itself does not affect ones health; it is the increase in use

that results from the legalization. The study explains the adverse health problems attributed to

marijuana legalization and its use.

Moreover, both scholarly articles communicate with their audience through the use of

evidence. The typical conventions of an academic article provide examples, references and

statistics from other and professionals to obtain credibility. Both articles successfully follow

these norms, as exemplified when the authors of Legalization of medical marijuana and

marijuana use among youths refers to The British Medical Journal regarding the effect of

cannabis consumption on motor vehicle collision. Through using references from other

scholarly articles, the authors are able to acquire credibility and strengthen his argument that the

legalization is highly correlated with automobile accidents. Likewise, authors of Marijuana

Legalization: Impact on Physicians and Public Health refers to Another study found a similarly

high rate (74%) of adolescents engaged in substance-abuse treatment who reported having used

diverted medical marijuana (59). Both articles also contribute to each of their academic

disciplines by adding new and reliable information that can be further analyzed or used for

research. As each article reflects typical conventions of their genres, each audience is able to

further grasp their theme.

 Furthermore, the audience of these genres are sociology, biology scholars, students and

those involved in politics. The article, Legalization of medical marijuana and marijuana use

among youths can be seen as accessible to anyone since the concepts exemplified are more

general, allowing people not within that field of profession are able to understand it. For

example, These prevention efforts should focus on norms surrounding marijuana use in the

community, family and among peers, availability of marijuana and enforcement in order to

reduce marijuana use among youths illustrate a simple, yet clear diction. This appeals to the

general public who are affected by the law it and also sends a message to sociology scholars that

further research and prevention is needed to reduce marijuana use. In addition, it is clear that the

authors appeal to those who can influence laws regarding marijuana. When explaining the legal

use of marijuana, the author claims, Medical marijuana laws are controversial and one of the

arguments against legalization of medical marijuana is that it is a pretext for recreational

marijuana use and could negatively impact youths. This clearly appeals to people involved in

politics who can influence the laws, as implied by the use of terms such as marijuana laws and

legalization. In contrast, the intended audience in Impact on Physicians and Public Health are

not the general public but those in the medical field. This is exemplified when the article uses a

specific lexicon for biological disciplines, such as Chronic, daily cannabis use is also associated

with the emergence of a motivational syndrome, characterized predominantly by a lack of

motivation and drive (46). The writing is targeted towards scholars or students studying in the

medical field because the general public is not familiar with medical terms

In conclusion, the debate whether marijuana use is beneficial or detrimental to our society

will continue to exist as the legal status of marijuana is rapidly changing; however, the studies
suggest that the normative environment is related to marijuana use among youths and the

increase in marijuana use raises public health issues.