|
|
|
TestimonyWho: Susan M. Connor, Ph.D., Injury
Prevention Research Manger, Rainbow Babies & Children’s
Hospital and Department of Pediatrics, Case Western Reserve University
Good afternoon. My name is Susan Connor and I am Injury Prevention Research Manager with Rainbow Babies & Children’s Hospital and Case Western Reserve University and former Clinical Research Coordinator for Rainbow’s Level I Pediatric Trauma Center. I have been asked to speak to you today in support of House Bill 343 and to provide a research perspective on the risks facing teen drivers. Sixteen-year-olds have the highest crash rates per mile driven of any age group; they also have the highest involvement in fatal crashes and single vehicle crashes. Teens’ higher crash rates are generally attributed to a combination of youth and inexperience—while they often drive more aggressively than older drivers, they are less able to recognize and respond to hazardous situations1,2 and often lack a recognition of their own limitations as drivers.3 For teen drivers, having teen passengers dramatically increases the likelihood and magnitude of risky behaviors like speeding, tailgating, and reckless driving,4 thereby significantly increasing the risk of involvement in a fatal crash.1 While many teen driver crashes are the result of inexperience and error, rather than reckless behavior, the presence of teen passengers divides a novice driver’s attention and increases the likelihood of error while decreasing a teen driver’s ability to respond appropriately to common hazards.5,6,7 Beginning in the mid-1990s, graduated drivers licensing (GDL) laws began to spring up around the country as a means of decreasing risk for the youngest drivers. GDL laws are aimed at deterring risky behaviors by introducing multi-tier licensing systems that keep the newest drivers off the road at the most dangerous times of day and increase the number of hours novice drivers must spend behind the wheel with licensed adults. In a number of states, although not currently in Ohio, graduated licensing laws also place limitations on the number of teen passengers that can travel with a novice driver. While there is strong evidence from dozens of studies that the introduction of graduated licensing significantly reduces 16-year-olds’ involvement in motor vehicle crashes, the effectiveness of a GDL system in reducing teen drivers’ crash risk is only as strong as the law itself.8,9 GDL programs vary widely between states, which is reflected in their impact on crash rates. Ohio’s GDL law currently contains a provision restricting night driving (1 a.m. to 5 p.m.) for temporary and probationary license holders under the age of 17, yet the mere passage of time does not negate the need for practice and does not make a novice driver any less prone to error, whether they are 16 or 18.10 Risk to teen drivers is low during the temporary period, then rises rapidly in the first few months after licensure; this is true regardless of the age at which a teen is first granted a probationary license.2 By applying night driving restrictions during the probationary period for all drivers, regardless of age, the bill introduced by Rep. Raga makes a significant step forward in protecting young drivers during the first few critical months. Ohio’s current GDL provisions also fail entirely to address one of the primary dangers for novice drivers—the presence of teen passengers. Because the ultimate purpose of GDL is to manage risk as new drivers learn, Ohio’s failure to limit the presence of teen passengers has been a glaring shortcoming of the current law. Rigorous research indicates that night driving and passenger restrictions are the cornerstones of the most effective GDL programs, because they control the two greatest dangers facing young drivers.8,9,11-14 Further, comparison of the attitudes and reported actions of parents and teens in states with varying levels of graduated licensing provisions indicates that parents are better able to establish and enforce restrictions on their children’s driving in states with strong GDL laws.15 Parents look to the law for guidance, and weak laws fail parents and children. I urge you not to view strengthening of GDL laws as “punishing” good kids or harried parents. There is ample evidence to indicate that the overwhelming majority of parents support restrictions for novice drivers.16 As Patricia Waller points out in an excellent paper on the issues that underlie the nationwide move to GDL10: Simply because a student has good grades and is well behaved does not mean that they can acquire a complex psychomotor skill with minimal preparation. We would not expect such students to automatically acquire athletic skill or be able to play a musical instrument with minimal instruction because of their stellar personal attributes (p. 19). Operating a motor vehicle is a substantially riskier activity than playing the piano, yet we as a society often seem to expect our children to become experts after six months of supervised “practice” behind the wheel. The provisions of House Bill 343 are common sense measures. The night driving and teen passenger restrictions in the bill address the two greatest dangers to teen drivers. There is a wealth of high-quality research evidence that GDL systems are most effective in decreasing novice drivers’ crash risk when they contain the type of provisions specified in HB 343. In my opinion, this is the very least we can do to protect the young people of our state. Thank you. References
|
|||
|
|||
