Root of the problem

Drivers charged with DUI should be screened, helped

Our penal system is about more than punishment. Or, it is supposed to be. Rehabilitation is purported to be a goal. When it comes to drunken driving, screening for underlying drug and mental health issues, followed by intensive counseling, are critical steps toward rehabilitation — which will benefit offenders and society as a whole.

A national study of drunken driving concludes that states must go beyond existing protocols to get at the root of impaired driving — an offense that is often repeated by the offender. Drunken driving frequently results in the most deadly accidents on our nation’s highways. Drunken driving doesn’t just involve alcohol. It can involve drug impairment, as well.

The study by the Governors Highway Safety Association has determined that about a third of all highway fatalities in 2018 were caused by drunken drivers and a third of those drivers were repeat offenders.

The report recommends that those charged with DUI or DWI (driving under the influence or driving while intoxicated, respectively) be screened and targeted for intensive counseling related to drug and mental health issues.

This strategy comports with the goal of rehabilitation, which reflects more than compassion for the offender; it represents a nod to enlightened self-interest for society.

The GHSA report, a 61-page document titled “High-Risk Impaired Drivers: Combating a Critical

Threat,” notes that although arrests for drunken driving are declining, about one-third of the 36,560 highway fatalities in 2018 could be linked to impaired drivers. That’s an average of 29 alcohol-related deaths a day. And 9% of those impaired drivers had prior convictions and they were responsible for nearly one-third of all fatalities in alcohol-related deaths.

The study’s author, Pam Shadel Fischer — who suffers the effects of a traffic accident caused by an impaired driver who was a repeat offender — rightly called it: “We know if all we do is catch them and convict them, that doesn’t work . ... We need to look at each person and see what’s at the root of this behavior. Unless we understand what caused them to get behind the wheel in that condition in the first place, how can we stop them from doing it again?”

An individualized approach has been found to be more impactful.

The report notes that Virginia and Minnesota lead the country in the kind of comprehensive program found to have been most effective.

Counties around Pennsylvania, including Allegheny, have implemented programs aimed at dealing with the particulars of drunken driving. For example, Allegheny County Pretrial Services does some early evaluation of defendants and Common Pleas Court has a DUI court supervised by Judge Kevin Sasinoski.

But, Pennsylvania’s highway safety advisory group should look to the best practices (the kind modeled by Virginia and Minnesota) for ways to improve.