Enforcement-oriented countermeasure programs to prevent alcohol-related fatal crashes in the United States have not been more effective because they have been based on a number of misconceptions. It is widely believed that (a) 50% of all traffic deaths involve alcohol, (b) alcohol-related fatal crashes are part of a continuum beginning with the minor fender bender, (c) one-third of all fatal crashes are caused by problem drinkers, (d) all problem drinkers, heavy drinkers in general and youth who drink are high-risk drivers and (e), that those arrested for DWI are of the same population as those involved in alcohol-related fatal crashes. It is further believed that mass arrests for DWI would reduce the number of alcohol-related fatal crashes. A review of the literature reveals that the proportion of all fatal crashes involving alcohol in some causal fashion is closer to 30% than to 50%, that relatively few alcoholics are high-risk drivers and that it is not alcohol alone that leads to crash involvement but alcohol in combination with such characteristics or conditions as alienation, hostility, aggression, and/or transient traumatic experiences. Mass arrests for DWI have not been effective in preventing alcohol-related deaths. The frequency of impaired driving episodes is believed to be of such magnitude and the relative likelihood of involvement in an alcohol-related fatal crash is so low that current DWI enforcement programs are regarded as inefficient means to prevent alcohol-related deaths. Recommendations to define the problem more clearly are presented. It is concluded that, if fatal crashes are the problem of concern (as opposed to the use of alcohol), the focus of research must be turned from drinking (per se) to the behaviour, characteristics or conditions that precede or accompany fatal crashes, only some of which are triggered or exacerbated by alcohol. This approach would not only focus attention on the estimated 30% of all fatal crashes that involve alcohol, but on the other 70% as well.
Abstract