Showing papers on "Driving under the influence published in 1982"

Fatal snowmobile accidents in northern Sweden.

Abstract: The number of snowmobiles registered in Sweden has increased rapidly in recent years. At the same time, there has been a proportional increase in the number of snowmobile accidents. In the present study all the 36 fatal accidents reported in northern Sweden in the period 1 July 1973 to 1 July 1981 have been scrutinized. Most of the fatalities were men, two thirds of them between 20 and 40 years of age. Most of the accidents occurred at weekends and during holidays, especially in the spring, when the traffic is heaviest. About two thirds of the fatal accidents occurred at night. Drowning and lacerations of the thorax and the head were the most common causes of death. Twenty-four of the 30 drivers killed were found to have been driving under the influence of alcohol. This suggests that alcohol was a major contributing factor to the accidents. Retrospective analyses of police, social, and medical records revealed that a high proportion of the deceased were habitual excessive drinkers. Preventive measures designed to reduce alcohol consumption while driving snowmobiles seem to be needed.

Driving under the influence of drugs other than alcohol.

Abstract: This paper illustrates different aspects of the problem of driving under the influence of medicine and is based on a survey carried out in 1976 on three groups of drivers: (a) drivers consuming prescription drugs and alcohol; (b) drivers consuming prescription drugs only; and (c) drivers consuming alcohol only. Traffic accidents and traffic accident risks are approximately equal for all three groups, although the author points out that the frequency of traffic accidents and traffic accident risks involving prescription drug intoxicated drivers is probably larger than indicated by the study, as the sample was drawn from persons suspected of drunken driving. The author recommends epidemiological studies of the problem which would be facilitated if the law permitted blood and urine samples to be taken from any driver stopped on the road. He also suggests that formation of interdisciplinary groups to investigate specific aspects of the problem and closer co-operation between interested countries.

Effectiveness of license suspension or revocation for drivers convicted of multiple driving under the influence offenses--an overview of three studies

Abstract: Three studies of the effects of licensing action on multiple DUI offenders are reported. The first two assessed the impact of license suspension or revocation compared to no licensing action or participation in an alcohol abuse treatment program. The third study dealt with the effects of licensing action on the DUI offender. The results showed that licensing action for multiple DUI offenders had a more positive traffic safety effect than either no licensing action or treatment programs. Both the magnitude and the duration of this effect are documented.

One more for the road

Abstract: In a year of apportionment, taxes, and the Equal Rights Amendment, the issue of driving under the influence surprisingly received considerable attention by the Florida Legislature. In the Senate and the House, legislators filed no fewer than 13 bills relating to drivers who operate motor vehicles under the influence of alcohol or drugs (DUI). Newspaper editorials, television news coverage, and intensive lobbying by constituents and organizations such as the Mothers Against Drunk Drivers all helped make DUI a major issue in the overloaded 1982 session. Responding to public pressure for reform of the DUI laws, the legislature enacted CS/CS/CS/ for SB's 69, 432, 312, 351, 39, and 285 (Florida Laws, Chapters 82-155, hereafter cited as CS/CS/CS for SB 69), which substantially revises the present DUI statutes. By this new law, which took effect July 1, 1982, Florida has joined a growing number of states which have recently acted to treat DUI offenders more severely. DUI is not a new problem to this state; apparently it is an issue whose time has finally arrived.

Effects of treatment on the dui offender in ventura county

Abstract: The Alcohol Information School (AIS) treats persons for problem drinking and/or alcoholism. Participants are those persons referred by courts following conviction for a first or subsequent offense of driving under the influence of intoxicating liquor (DUI). First offenders are assigned to the Level I program for five weeks of treatment. Multiple offenders are assigned to the Level II program for one year of treatment, in lieu of license suspension or revocation. Three studies examined the effectiveness of the AIS programs by (a) determining the percent of participants who were not rearrested for a DUI or related offense for up to four years after their original conviction, and then (b) comparing these survival rates to the survival rates of other DUI offenders who either received no treatment or who had their licenses suspended or revoked. There were two biases in the data that require further research for clarification. However, they tended to offset each other. Overall, the three studies supported an AIS treatment effect: in all 13 key comparisons the AIS participants had a higher survival rate, and in 11 of the 13 comparisons the survival rates were significantly higher. Level I participants had an average 10% higher survival rate than did a statewide sample of DUI first offenders who received no treatment, and a 6% higher survival rate when compared to a Ventura no treatment sample. Level II participants had an average 5% and 10% higher survival rate than did a statewide sample of DUI multiple offenders who had their licenses either suspended or revoked, respectively. Drop outs from the Levels I and II programs were at significantly higher risk of repeating their offense when compared to completers, suggesting that drop outs may be a logical target for additional countermeasures.

What works? Some observations about the evaluation of DUI programs

Abstract: Discussion of process, and impact evaluations of interventions for drivers convicted of driving under the influence (DUI) of alcohol.