["Sociology of Health & Illness, Volume 43, Issue 2, Page 316-335, February 2021. ", "\nAbstract\nAlthough public debates on cannabis are ongoing in many countries, there are currently no EU‐wide rules for either medical or recreational use of cannabis. Numerous studies have illustrated that creating such rules is a complex challenge. The battle over the legalisation of medical use of cannabis in Poland is a good example for analysing the mutual impact of the social practices that various actors perform through and by the discourses in the field of health care: how they discursively create their own roles and take positions and how they shape the coalitions and opposition in trying to achieve their strategic goals. This article aims to reconstruct and explain how different types of knowledge are discursively used to sustain or question power relations in the healthcare field. The dispersed knowledge‐power influences social actors, who try to define or redefine social practices and aspire to guide them in the healthcare field. The presented approach allows authors to go beyond the social actors’ perception vs institutional regulations and to analyse discursive actions as elements of the complex networks of meanings activating various type of resources. Those dynamic networks, involving the different (and sometimes the same) actors in the different actions, open the new fields of rationality. Starting by identifying the crucial actors and their discursive actions visible in the mainstream press discourse, we will reconstruct three types of groups related to medical cannabis. We will then investigate three types of dispositives – law, discipline and security – to investigate the relations between discursive and non‐discursive elements. The proposed analysis belongs to the Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) paradigm and includes investigation of the media discourses and in‐depth interviews with the identified actors.\n"]