A Failure to Communicate

I don't think anyone is "pro" drunk driving, but I’ll be the first to admit it; there is a resentment in recovery circles when the subject of license revocation and other penalties for DUI are discussed. I’ve participated in groups where MADD is spoke of with open hostility because of legislation they have enabled which many believe to be just punitive rather than preventative. Much of this animosity is created by the requirement of courts that offenders must attend recovery programs and outpatient treatment while at the same time taking away their ability (driver’s license) to accomplish this task. This does not stop an alcoholic from driving, yet it may very well be instrumental in obstructing the potential recovery opportunity that a brush with the law offers.

While holding a similar opinion on the suspension or revocation of a driver’s license, I feel the problem lies more with the recovery community and our failure to communicate with the judicial system, law enforcement, and advocacy groups like MADD. The fight against drunk driving has traditionally focused more upon the act itself and less about the underlying causes. Raising both awareness and the drinking age while lowering the BAC standard for impairment has proven to discourage driving under the influence. New technology such as ignition interlocks are being explored to reduce repeat offenders. While measures taken over the last few decades have certainly been effective in reducing drunk driving, but what of the alcoholics, those of us that will drink, and drive, despite all preventive measures and consequences?

Click “Read more” to continue…

Penalties discourage drinking and driving, interlocks may help prevent repeat offenders, but I personally believe that both will just reinforcement the diseased thinking of an alcoholic and promote counterproductive behavior. So how do you combat the systemic impaired driving of alcoholics without facing the catch 22 of potentially hampering recovery from the underlying cause?

Much like the interlocks the answer may involve new technology such as transdermal perspiration monitoring bracelets. These devices already being used in some states to detect alcohol via a sensor touching the skin. Similar to house arrest anklets they communicate with central servers and can alert authorities of intoxication. One of the industry leaders of this technology is adding GPS and wireless functionality to the devices. Giving DUI offenders the choice of the bracelet or suspension of driving priviledges and jail would better enable the court ordered or self imposed treatment and encourage recovery meeting attendance. Not a complete solution I agree, but it would offer several significant improvements in the war on drunk driving.

1. Funds from administrative and operation fees paid by wearer could be used to fund required education and treatment programs.
2. Removes the argument that license suspension discourages treatment and recovery meetings as well as punishing families dependent upon the transportation for work and school.
3. No longer would an alcoholic be able to continue to drink and drive until caught again, the GPS functionality would allow for their immediate arrest before they get behind the wheel.

The last point is truly significant when dealing with repeat offenders and alcoholics. If courts could make complete abstinence from alcohol a provision for non-confinement and driving rights, those that decide to drink anyway would be picked up quickly and placed in jail or treatment where they belong. This means avoiding the risks and dangers involved with the 88 instances of impaired driving that can occur before an arrest is made.

During a decade of drinking I drove impaired on a regular basis, in most cases daily. A thousand times behind the wheel drunk, yet I received only one DUI. Whether it be providence or just blind luck that prevented me from taking the lives of others while trying to maintain focus and consciousness at 70 mph, I am an eternally grateful.
Now with over a decade of sobriety under my belt I understand that it wouldn’t have mattered if it was one or four DUI’s, with or without license, nothing would have kept me off the road and my continuous search for more alcohol. Jail and death were the only things that would have prevented me from endangering the public during this time and treatment was something I didn't consider possible.

Personal experience such as mine could be extremely valuable in this fight, but the historical anonymity of the recovery community and the stigma associated with alcoholism are barriers we need to remove. More communication between groups such as MADD and those well versed in recovery issues would help remove the resentment that I am sure is felt by both. No doubt all involved understand the dangers of drunk driving and would like to see it stopped, it will just take active lines of communication to combine the goals that include recovery, sobriety, and an end to drunk driving into a comprehensive solution.

I intend to do my part in starting this dialogue.