Impaired Drivers: An Overview
Each year, more
people are killed in motor vehicle crashes in Minnesota
than in all criminal activity combined. Impaired
drivers are responsible for half of the traffic deaths in this State. These two statements are a reflection of an
epidemic of useless violence and carnage that is true in every State in the Union. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (N.H.T.S.A.), when all of the medical bills, attorney fees, civil
settlements, criminal sanctions and related monetary costs are combined, impaired drivers
cause more monetary loss than all other criminal activities combined. Among the problems caused by impaired drivers are
death, injury, pain, suffering, mental anguish, insurance rate increases and higher
medical costs.
In 1988
N.H.T.S.A. submitted a report to Congress entitled, Use of Controlled Substances and
Highway Safety which revealed that 10% to 15% of all fatally injured drivers had used
drugs prior to the crash and that the incidence of drug involvement by impaired drivers
detained by the Police ranged from 14% to 50%. This
corroborated the findings in an earlier (Compton and aAnderson 1985) report. A Tennessee study
(Kirby and Maul 1988) revealed that 56% of the drivers injured in motor
vehicle crashes tested positive for alcohol and or other drugs while 37% tested positive
for alcohol only and 40% tested positive for at least one drug other than alcohol. Other studies have confirmed the alarming rate of
use of alcohol and other drugs by drivers involved in crashes and of the use of alcohol with
other drugs in combination. The current
N.H.T.S.A. curriculum for Standardized Field Sobriety Testing and Horizontal Gaze
Nystagmus training estimates the use of other drugs in combination with alcohol by
impaired drivers at approximately 65%. Sixty-five
percent of all drivers arrested for D.U.I. have also ingested some other drug!
This statistic
has always been frustrating for Police Officers who have had to release a person arrested
for D.U.I. because of low breath alcohol test results. Why did the suspect do so poorly on the field sobriety
tests? Why did the person exhibit driving
patterns so indicative of impairment? Was the
person ill? Could the Officers
conclusions have been in error? Until
recently, there has been no accurate method for answering these questions.
The Solution
In Los Angeles,
however, an L.A.P.D. Officer believed that there had to be a way to evaluate a
persons level of impairment and relate that impairment to drug involvement. Sgt. Dick Studdard began working with friends in
the narcotics division and in the medical community which resulted in the process we now
called the Drug Evaluation and Classification program or DEC.
A DEC
practitioner is commonly referred to as a D.R.E. (Drug Recognition Expert), D.R.T. (Drug
Recognition Technician), or D.R.O. (Drug Recognition Officer); the terms are
interchangeable for discussion purposes and are simply a matter of semantics which vary
from state-to-state. The course of
instruction, the certification process and the methods employed by the Officer, however,
remain the same regardless of the terminology used. The
result is the same also, a properly trained Officer following the approved evaluation
process is able to accurately identify drug impairment and correctly categorize the drug
or drugs involved.
The value of the program and the validity
of the techniques used also remains the same from state-to-state. Drug impaired drivers are being arrested and
prosecuted with success. The program has been
shown to be of such value to traffic safety and the credibility of the program has been
sufficient to draw national attention as well as international interest. Currently thrirty - two states and the District of
Columbia have a DEC program while several other states have applied to N.H.T.S.A. for site
consideration. Foreign countries including
Australia and Germany are investigating the DEC program as an option, while site
inspection for Canada has already begun.
Validation
The attraction to the program is in
part a result of the accuracy of the practitioners and the credibility of the protocol as
demonstrated by various research groups. The
initial validation study for the DEC program was a controlled laboratory evaluation
conducted by N.H.T.S.A. in 1984 at Johns Hopkins University (Bigelow, et al, 1985). The D.R.E.s involved were able to correctly
identify:
Þ 95% of the Drug Free
subject as unimpaired;
Þ 98.7% of the High-dose
subjects as impaired, and;
Þ 91.7% of the drug(s) involved with the
High-Dose subjects.
A subsequent Field Validation Study
sponsored by N.H.T.S.A. in 1985 (Compton, 1986) verified the accuracy of the D.R.E.s and
the DEC program. The study showed that:
Þ Blood tests confirmed the presence of
drugs other than alcohol 94% of the time when
predicted by the D.R.E.;
Þ D.R.E.s were able to correctly identify
at least one drug other than alcohol in 87% of the suspects evaluated;
Þ In nearly 50% of the individuals, the
D.R.E.s were able to correctly identify all of the drugs detected in the blood
(Most suspects had used multiple drugs other than alcohol);
Þ 50% of the suspects who had used drugs
had also used alcohol;
Þ Only 3.7% of those who had used drugs
had a blood alcohol concentration of 0.10% or higher.
Based on the last statistic, it
becomes apparent that a majority of persons who ingest drugs and alcohol would have to be
released on D.U.I. cases due to the low blood alcohol concentrations. The DEC program is designed to address this
problem.
The DEC Program
What is the DEC Program?
The
DEC (Drug Evaluation and Classification) program is a standardized and systematic method for
evaluating a person suspected of driving while impaired to determine:
Þ Whether or not the suspect is impaired and
if impaired;
Þ Whether the impairment is medically related
or drug related and if drug related;
Þ
What
category or combination of categories of drugs caused the impairment.
Are there limitations to
the program? There are certain limitations that are important
to understand. First, the DEC process is not
a Field Test.
It is a post-arrest procedure which requires a very controlled environment
not available to the officer in the field. Second,
the D.R.E. will not be able to identify the exact drug which is causing the impairment. Rather, the D.R.E. is able to identify impairment
consistent with one of seven classes of drugs. A
D.R.E., for example, might identify the category Central Nervous System
Stimulants, but could not distinguish between amphetamines, cocaine or crystal
methamphetamines. Third, the D.R.E. protocol
is not a substitute for chemical
testing. While the D.R.E. will be able to
articulate signs of impairment and relate that impairment to one or more drug categories,
chemical testing is still highly desirable to corroborate the D.R.E.s opinion.
What is a drug, and what
are these drug categories?
The word, Drug has different meanings depending on the person using the
term. Many lay-persons think only illicit
substances like heroin and PCP are drugs, while others consider all chemical compounds
taken into the body to be drugs. N.H.T.S.A.
has a definition more specific to the problem of impaired driving.
A drug is any chemical
substance, natural or synthetic which, when taken into the human body, can impair the
ability of the person to operate a motor vehicle safely.
The DEC program classifies drugs of
abuse into seven categories based on the effects and the observable signs and symptoms of
the substance. While these categories do not
correspond exactly with those typically found in medical texts, clinicians in the area of
substance abuse and mental health do use a similar classification system.
The seven drug
categories are listed below with common examples of each.
Central Nervous System
(C.N.S.) Depressants: The most abused example is alcohol, but also
included are barbiturates and valium. These
drugs cause a general slowing of the central nervous system with slower heart rate, lower
blood pressure, diminished mental faculties, etc.
C.N.S. Stimulants: Popular
drugs of abuse in this category include cocaine and crystal methamphetamines which cause a
general speeding-up of the metabolism.
Hallucinogens:
This category includes the psychedelic drugs such as LSD and peyote. They cause hallucinations and altered perceptions
of reality.
Phencyclidine:
This category includes Phencyclidine (PCP or Angel dust) and its
analogs such as Ketamine. These drugs produce
some effects which are similar to C.N.S. depressants, some effects which are similar to
C.N.S. stimulants and can also cause hallucinations.
Narcotic Analgesics: This
category includes the opiates such as heroine and morphine as well as the synthetic
opiates such as methadone which dull pain and produce a feeling of euphoria.
Inhalants:
Examples of this category
include volatile solvents such as paint and modeling glue, anesthetic gases such as
nitrous oxide and aerosols such as freon.
Cannabis:
All of the psychoactive byproducts of the cannabis sativa plant containing
the substance delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol or THC are included in this last category
including marijuana and hashish. Also
included is Dronabinol, a synthetic THC.
How can the D.R.E.
determine which drug category is causing the impairment that is observed?
The D.R.E. performs various clinical and physical exams and
administers a battery of psycho-motor exams
and is able to identify the drug category or categories based on the observable
indicators. The process, sometimes called,
The D.R.E. Twelve-Step Process, includes a blood pressure check, a pulse
check, a check for horizontal gaze nystagmus, the Rhomberg Balance Test and the
Walk-And-Turn test among others. The D.R.E. does not make any assumption or draw any
conclusion until the evaluation procedure is complete and the conclusion is based on all
of the evidence gathered during the D.R.E. evaluation.
Why is the D.R.E.
necessary if a drug test can detect the drug anyway?
Aside from Constitutional search-and-seizure considerations, there are two
important reasons why the drug test can not be used alone.
First, a drug test to screen for all drugs is very costly whereas if the
chemist knows what to look for from the D.R.E.s report the cost can be more
reasonable. More important than cost however,
is the fact that a drug test can only detect the presence
of a drug. The D.R.E. can show the impairment consistent with that drug and
determine that not only was the drug present, but that it was psycho-active at the time of
the evaluation.
If the D.R.E. can do all
of that, is the chemical test necessary?
The D.R.E. can identify the presence of a category of drugs with great
accuracy, but the drug test is a necessary corroboration of the D.R.E.s opinion that
it was in fact a drug causing the impairment and not a physical condition or illness.
The Twelve-Step
Process
The D.R.E.s watch-words are Standardized and Systematic. Every D.R.E. trained in every DEC State performs
the same examinations and checks in the same order. Nothing
is left to the D.R.E.s discretion. Every
step of the D.R.E. Process is performed in sequence whether the D.R.E. expects a positive
result or not. Nothing is omitted and nothing
is added to the process. For example, if a
suspect were arrested in the act of snorting cocaine and freely admitted to
using the drug, the D.R.E. would still perform the HGN test even though the D.R.E. knows
that cocaine does not affect nystagmus.
1. Breath Alcohol Test
Every D.R.E. Evaluation begins with a breath test for alcohol for several reasons. First, the D.R.E. process was designed to provide
law enforcement with a tool for prosecuting drivers impaired by drugs other than alcohol. Therefore, the first step is to determine if the
observed impairment is alcohol related. If it
is, then the suspect is charged with Driving Under the Influence of Liquor and the D.R.E.
protocol is not necessary. If there is
evidence of impairment and that impairment is not consistent with the blood alcohol
concentration, then the D.R.E. protocol is used to determine if that impairment can be
related to the ingestion of some other drug or drugs.
2.
Interview of the Arresting Officer
The arresting officer may not be as knowledgeable about drugs, street drug terms, drug
paraphernalia, etc. as the D.R.E. so this step allows the D.R.E. to gain more insight into
the circumstances surrounding the arrest, and may uncover additional evidence.
3.
Preliminary Examination
This initial observation and
interview provides the D.R.E. with the opportunity to perform a medical assessment to try
to rule out medical reasons for the impairment, illness or injury, etc. This stage includes the D.R.E.s observations
of the suspect (appearance, attitude, speech pattern, etc.), medical indicators (illness,
injury, medication, etc.) and a check of the suspects pulse (the first of three
taken).
4.
Examination of the Eyes
In this stage, the D.R.E.
checks the eyes for Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (HGN), Vertical Nystagmus (VN) and Lock of
Convergence (LoC). Certain drug categories
such as Depressants and PCP can cause these clues to become evident while others such as
Stimulants and Narcotics have no effect on these Eye-Indicators.
5.
Divided Attention Psychophysical Tests
These tests (Walk-and-Turn, One-Leg-Stand, etc.) evaluate the suspects ability to
divide his or her attention between physical tasks such as walking and balancing and
mental tasks such as remembering instructions. The
Rhomberg Balance test further evaluates the suspects Inner-clock to
determine if the suspects perception of the passage of time has been impaired. Narcotic analgesics, for example, cause a
persons inner clock to slow considerably. A
person under the influence of a narcotic analgesic when asked to estimate the passage of
thirty seconds may take two minutes or more.
6.
Vital
Signs Examination
Using the same tools and
techniques that a medical professional would use, the D.R.E. checks the same signs, pulse,
blood pressure and temperature. Different
categories of drugs have different measurable effects on the vital signs. Stimulants (like cocaine) elevate these signs,
narcotics (like heroine) depress these signs. Cannabis
on the other hand elevate pulse and blood pressure but do not affect temperature. This is the second check of the suspects
pulse.
7.
Dark
Room Examination
The dark room exam includes
checking the suspects pupils for reactivity to light and for size under varying lighting
conditions. Certain drugs cause pupils to
dilate noticeably and others have no effect. Narcotic
analgesics are the only drugs (by category) to cause pupils to constrict.
8.
Examination of Muscle Tone
Flaccid muscle tone is
generally associated with narcotic analgesics, but muscle tone that appears cyclic from
rigidity to relaxation can be caused by PCP and is a warning to the D.R.E. to the
possibility of bizarre or violent behavior.
9.
Examination for Injection Sites
While most drugs of abuse are taken orally or inhaled, several are injected as in heroin
use. The number and condition of the
injection sites may give the D.R.E. an indicator of how long the suspect has been using
the drug and approximately when it was last administered.
At this time the D.R.E. also checks the subjects pulse for the third
and last time.
10.
Interview, Suspects Statements and Other Observations
The preceding nine steps
usually give the D.R.E. an articulable suspicion of the category of drug used and possibly
of the time since ingestion. In this stage,
the D.R.E. adheres to constitutional guidelines while questioning the suspect about the
use, frequency, and type of drug (category) suspected as well as the suspected drug
causing the observed impairment.
11.
Opinion of Evaluator
At this stage, the D.R.E.
renders an opinion regarding impairment or non-impairment based on the totality of the
facts, observations and circumstances surrounding the incident and articulates the facts
to support that opinion.
12.
Toxicological Report
The toxicological report will
be issued by the laboratory based on the sample provided by the D.R.E. at the time of the
evaluation. The type of sample obtained and
the tests requested will be determined by the drug or drugs suspected by the D.R.E..
A typical D.R.E. evaluation
takes thirty to forty-five minutes and requires a controlled environment. The D.R.E. must be able to use a secure room to
perform the dark room examination and must be able to control the lighting. The D.R.E. must also be able to obtain a sample of
blood or urine for toxicological examination. These
are some of the factors which preclude the use of the D.R.E. Evaluation process as a field
procedure.
D.R.E. Training Curriculum
S.F.S.T./H.G.N. School:
Before a candidate may be accepted for training as a D.R.E., he or she
should have not only completed the N.H.T.S.A. approved S.F.S.T./ (D.W.I. Detection and
Standardized Field Sobriety Testing), but should also be afforded sufficient time to use H.G.N. and the S.F.S.T.s to become proficient. The N.H.T.S.A. S.F.S.T.. training includes 32
hours of total training with two alcohol labs in which the students are allowed to examine
subjects who have been dosed on alcohol to different levels. Neither the students nor the subjects know what
each subjects B.A.C. is and the students must arrive at an arrests/no-arrest
decision based only on the results of their examination.
D.R.E. Pre-School:
After becoming proficient in administering the S.F.S.T. tests, the students
participate in a sixteen-hour class in preparation for the formal D.R.E. training. This training includes another alcohol lab but the
students must perform the D.R.E. 12-Step protocol on the suspects to determine C.N.S.
Depressant impairment (since alcohol is in this category.)
D.R.E. School:
The formal D.R.E. school includes fifty-six hours of classroom training in
subjects which including legal issues, practice sessions, D.R.E. program validation, case
preparation and testimony.
Written and Proficiency
Exams: During the D.R.E. Pre-School and the D.R.E.
School, students must pass a total of five written quizzes with a minimum score of 80% as well as a final written exam with a
passing grade of 80%. In addition, each student must demonstrate
proficiency in administering the S.F.S.T.s, and D.R.E. 12-Step protocol before a certified
instructor before being allowed to move on to the last step in the training, the field
Certification Training.
Certification Training:
During the field Certification Training, the student is assigned to a D.R.E.
who supervises the student during the administration of the D.R.E. Protocol to persons
actually arrested and suspected of being impaired by drugs other than alcohol. This real world experience removes the student
from the artificiality of the classroom setting. Subjects
are impaired by real drugs, at street doses.
The student does has no idea what category of drugs a particular subject has
ingested. To pass this part of the training,
the student must evaluate a minimum of twelve subjects.
Of the twelve, the student must personally administer the protocol to at
least six and may sit-in on six other evaluations administered by another
student. In addition, the student must have
been exposed to at least four different drug categories and must have an accuracy of at
least 75%. The student must also pass another
written examination with a minimum score of 80%. Only
after all of these criteria are met can an officer be considered a certified D.R.E..
The Goal
As with all traffic enforcement
measures, a major goal of the D.R.E. program is to increase public awareness. Driving while under the influence of alcohol or
any other drug is a crime. D.U.I. violators
are killing people and the public needs to realize that it is no longer acceptable to
have, One for the road before driving home.
People need to understand that an impaired driver is a serious problem
whether it is the result of Only two beers or heroin or the pills the dentist
prescribed for a tooth-ache. People need to
know that the Police Department is actively pursuing impaired drivers. With public awareness and public compliance we can reduce the useless killing. By reducing the number of violations through
enforcement and through education, we can reduce the deaths and injuries on our
highways; we can reduce the pain and suffering; we can reduce property
damage in this state.
|