are there tests that can test for 2 years or is that certificate going to be a monthly 2 year process? or do you think a doctor will just test me and sign the form?

That probably depends on which doctor you see. Ask your ATTORNEY for a referral to a doctor who knows what you need, BEFORE you ask a doctor about this, and make a medical record that might HURT the case.

A doctor who normally handles addictions will be much more comfortable with your case than the average doctor. (You need the right guy.)

If it sounds like some of us think you should talk to one of the recommended attorneys NOW, well, yeah, that's what we think.

Good luck. You've got a winnable case, if you have stated the facts correctly and completely; don't screw it up.

Seems to me that an argument can be made overe the word "abused". I don't consider all use of controlled substances (legal and illegal) abuse, and I'm sure that there are doctors who might have the same opinion.

CONSULT WITH AN ATTORNEY

Sure. "Used" and "abused" are completely different concepts.

The right doctor will know whether you "abuse" simply by talking to you and observing your reactions. I doubt if he would even bother with a physical drug test, except if your attorney requsted one to bolster your case. But the results of a physical drug test would not even influence his opinion as to whether you abuse drugs, I don't think.

In fact, if I met doctor who suggested a "drug test" was even important to the question of whether a subject was using or abusing, I'd go elsewhere. Tests are for probation officers and defense attorneys, not doctors. Really. Anybody can beat a test. They can't beat the right doctor or counselor, they just think they can.

Just visit with one of the attorneys. They know.

FWIW: In many situations having to do with the intersections of the topics of sentencing law, chem dep treatment, probation, and "what Joe the redneck hard-drinking farmboy 69-year-old district court judge thinks", the word "abuse", in the verb-type context, was put in to differentiate between "Your Honor, I have a prescription for that morphine sulfate Contin right here in my wallet, and I was taking it for the pain, just like the doc told me", and "oh, THOSE amphetamines? Well, yeah, they're mine . . . prescription? Umm . . . . uh . . . . no . . . ."

Legal and proper use versus "abuse." They read "abuse" as specifically meaning "outside of legal and proper use."

Pot, on the other hand, (ignoring the whole "medical maryjane" soap opera), has no legal uses in our community. Therefore (say most of the judges - at least, all the judges who didn't spend all six years of college high), there is no "legal and proper use", and all use is thus, by definition, "abuse."

I'd avoid that whole argument. It's every bit as effective as "I couldn't have been speeding, my car won't even GO that fast", or "no, sir, I guess she fell."